search for: fsattr

On Tuesday, 20 September 2016 16:19:30 CEST Matteo Cafasso wrote: > + for (index = 0; index < count; index++) { > + fsattr = tsk_fs_file_attr_get_idx (fsfile, index); > + > + if (fsattr != NULL && fsattr->flags & TSK_FS_ATTR_NONRES) > + tsk_fs_attr_walk (fsattr, flags, attrwalk_callback, (void *) &blkdata); The return code of tsk_fs_attr_walk must be checked. > +/* Attribute wal...

...t; + fs->close (fs); > + img->close (img); > + > + return ret; > +} > + > + (One extra empty line.) > +static TSK_WALK_RET_ENUM > +findblk_callback (TSK_FS_FILE *fsfile, const char *path, void *data) > +{ > + findblk_data blkdata; > + const TSK_FS_ATTR *fsattr = NULL; > + int ret = 0, count = 0, index = 0; > + uint64_t *block = (uint64_t *) data; Just dereference the pointer directly, so it will not be needed later on: const uint64_t block = * (uint64_t *) data; Or, even better, this can be done only when needed, ... > + const int flags...

v2: - use boolean field in struct - move refactoring to previous series Matteo Cafasso (3): New API: internal_find_block New API: find_block find_block: added API tests daemon/tsk.c | 90 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ generator/actions.ml | 25 ++++++++++++ src/MAX_PROC_NR | 2 +- src/tsk.c | 17 +++++++++

v3: - fixed attribute walk callback: checking against TSK_FS_BLOCK_FLAG_RAW flag would exclude compressed data blocks which are still important. Yet we want to exclude sparse blocks (TSK_FS_BLOCK_FLAG_SPARSE) as they are not stored on the disk. Matteo Cafasso (3): New API: internal_find_block New API: find_block find_block: added API tests daemon/tsk.c | 91

...K_WALK_CONT : TSK_WALK_ERROR; } +/* Find block, it gets called on every FS node. + * + * Return TSK_WALK_CONT on success, TSK_WALK_ERROR on error. + */ +static TSK_WALK_RET_ENUM +findblk_callback (TSK_FS_FILE *fsfile, const char *path, void *data) +{ + findblk_data blkdata; + const TSK_FS_ATTR *fsattr = NULL; + int ret = 0, count = 0, index = 0; + uint64_t *block = (uint64_t *) data; + const int flags = TSK_FS_FILE_WALK_FLAG_AONLY | TSK_FS_FILE_WALK_FLAG_SLACK; + + if (entry_is_dot (fsfile)) + return TSK_WALK_CONT; + + blkdata.found = 0; + blkdata.block = *block; + + /* Retrieve block...

...K_WALK_CONT : TSK_WALK_ERROR; } +/* Find block, it gets called on every FS node. + * + * Return TSK_WALK_CONT on success, TSK_WALK_ERROR on error. + */ +static TSK_WALK_RET_ENUM +findblk_callback (TSK_FS_FILE *fsfile, const char *path, void *data) +{ + findblk_data blkdata; + const TSK_FS_ATTR *fsattr = NULL; + int ret = 0, count = 0, index = 0; + uint64_t *block = (uint64_t *) data; + const int flags = TSK_FS_FILE_WALK_FLAG_AONLY | TSK_FS_FILE_WALK_FLAG_SLACK; + + if (entry_is_dot (fsfile)) + return TSK_WALK_CONT; + + blkdata.found = false; + blkdata.block = *block; + + /* Retrieve bl...

...K_WALK_CONT : TSK_WALK_ERROR; } +/* Find block, it gets called on every FS node. + * + * Return TSK_WALK_CONT on success, TSK_WALK_ERROR on error. + */ +static TSK_WALK_RET_ENUM +findblk_callback (TSK_FS_FILE *fsfile, const char *path, void *data) +{ + findblk_data blkdata; + const TSK_FS_ATTR *fsattr = NULL; + int ret = 0, count = 0, index = 0; + const int flags = TSK_FS_FILE_WALK_FLAG_AONLY | TSK_FS_FILE_WALK_FLAG_SLACK; + + if (entry_is_dot (fsfile)) + return TSK_WALK_CONT; + + blkdata.found = false; + blkdata.block = * (uint64_t *) data; + + /* Retrieve block list */ + count = tsk_...

Patch ready for merging. v4: - check return code of tsk_fs_attr_walk - pass TSK_FS_FILE_WALK_FLAG_NOSPARSE as additional flag to tsk_fs_attr_walk After discussing with TSK authors the behaviour is clear. [1] In case of COMPRESSED blocks, the callback will be called for all the attributes no matter whether they are on disk or not (sparse). In such cases, the block address will be 0. [2] So

This series is ready for review but requires the previous one to be merged first: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2016-September/msg00101.html The find_block API allows the User to search all the filesystem entries referring to a given data block and returns a tsk_dirent structure for each of them. Use case examples: - Check whether a block containing a deleted file has been re-used

Is there any performance problem with hard links in ZFS? I have a large storage. There will be near 50000 hard links for every file. Is it ok for ZFS? May be some problems with snapshots(every 30 minutes there will be a snapshot creating)? What about difference in speed while working with 50000 hardlinks or 50000 different files? ps: It would be very useful if you give me some links about

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6701 Summary: permission of attributes are not preserved Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: Other OS/Version: Solaris Status: NEW Severity: minor Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org ReportedBy: cavalli at cilea.it