Hello,

As we know our statfs needs to be modernized because we can only support
fs's up to 2TB. Here's a proposed new structure:

struct statvfs {
        uint32_t  f_flags;              /* copy of mount exported flags */
        uint32_t  f_bsize;              /* filesystem block size */
        unit32_t  f_frsize;             /* filesystem fragment size */
        uint32_t  f_iosize;             /* optimal transfer block size */ 
   
        uint64_t  f_blocks;             /* total data blocks in filesystem */
        uint64_t  f_bfree;              /* free blocks in filesystem */
        int64_t   f_bavail;             /* free blocks avail to non-superuser */
   
        uint64_t  f_files;              /* total file nodes in filesystem */
        uint64_t  f_ffree;              /* free nodes avail in filesystem */
        int64_t   f_favail;             /* free nodes avail to non-superuser */

        uint64_t  f_syncreads;          /* count of sync reads since mount */
        uint64_t  f_syncwrites;         /* count of sync writes since mount */
        uint64_t  f_asyncreads;         /* count of async reads since mount */
        uint64_t  f_asyncwrites;        /* count of async writes since mount */
        
        fsid_t    f_fsid;               /* filesystem id */
        uint32_t  f_namemax;            /* maximum filename length */
        uid_t     f_owner;              /* user that mounted the filesystem */

        char      f_fstypename[MFSNAMELEN]; /* filesystem type name */
        char      f_mntfromname[MNAMELEN];  /* mounted filesystem */
        char      f_mntonname[MNAMELEN];    /* directory on which mounted */
};     

Issues [I supply my opinions...]

1. Q: what should be the old ones named __foostatfs20()?
   A: I say yes since there is precedence of using the last OS version
      supported them natively.
2. Q: Should we go all the way and implement statvfs()?
   A: I think so. statfs() is a berkeleism.
   2a. Q: If we supply statvfs(), then do we still supply statfs too?
       A: Not sure.
   2b. Q: X/Open says we should use unsigned long for bsize, frsize and
          fsblkcnt_t for the rest. Should we do that?
       A: I say keep the types as I have them.
   2c. Q: bsize in statfs() has been the fragment size; bsize in statvfs()
	  is the block size, and frsize is the fragment size. Should we go
	  the statvfs() way.
       A: I propose go that way too.
3. Q: I added more stats, favail [statvfs has it too], is there anything else
      we need?
   A: ???
4. Q: Should we change sys_getstatfs() to take size_t instead of long as
      the second arg.
   A: I think so.

Please voice your thoughts,

christos