Re: New copyfile system call - discuss before LSF?

[Myklebust, Trond]

On Mar 30, 2013, at 5:45 PM, Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxx>
 wrote:

> 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

...and what's the big plan to make this work on anything other than ext4 and btrfs?

Cheers,
  Trond--
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/