Re: [RFC] pass FAF flag to perfuse

[Chuck Silvers <chuq%chuq.com@localhost>]

On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 02:23:47PM +0000, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 07:14:48AM -0700, Chuck Silvers wrote:
> > if this new flag is for userland only, why would you need to
> > assign an IO_* flag for it in the kernel?  it would be better to keep
> > this out of the kernel's flags if it doesn't need to be there.
> 
> The goal is to avoid that specific value to be used by someone else
> for another purpose. If that happens, I cannot do ioflag |= PUFFS_IO_FAF
> in userland anymore.

then you shouldn't do that, and instead pass around the userland flags
separately from the kernel flags.  or do you mean that you do pass
this flag into the kernel, but the kernel doesn't look at it and
just passes it back to userland to a different process that wants
to see it?

-Chuck