Re: New copyfile system call - discuss before LSF?

[Pavel Machek]

On Sat 2013-03-30 13:08:39, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On 2013-03-30, at 12:49 PM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > Hmm, really? AFAICT it would be simple to provide an
> > open_deleted_file("directory") syscall. You'd open_deleted_file(),
> > copy source file into it, then fsync(), then link it into filesystem.
> > 
> > That should have atomicity properties reflected.
> 
> Actually, the open_deleted_file() syscall is quite useful for many
> different things all by itself.  Lots of applications need to create
> temporary files that are unlinked at application failure (without a
> race if app crashes after creating the file, but before unlinking).
> It also avoids exposing temporary files into the namespace if other
> applications are accessing the directory.

Hmm. open_deleted_file() will still need to get a directory... so it
will still need a path. Perhaps open("/foo/bar/mnt", O_DELETED) would
be acceptable interface?
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/