From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
libc-alpha <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: RFC: reject unknown open flags
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 12:14:54 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFyKLCCe2OFCnyLYPDMT+DNWhYRQiLwFx1UU1+sf9w3oKA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ec12e823-5c32-3269-039a-1b97ab3d4819@cs.ucla.edu>
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 12:02 PM, Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu> wrote:
>
>> I'm assuming you'd also possible want to be able to use F_SETFL to set
>> O_ATOMIC after the fact
>
> Just for fun, one thread can set O_ATOMIC at the same time another thread is
> doing a 'write'....
I'm sure that falls under "if you break it, you get to keep both
pieces". IOW, I don't think anybody will ever say that the concurrent
write has to have some particular semantics wrt the concurrent
O_ATOMIC. Maybe *part* of the write will be done with some semantics,
and part of the write will be done with other semantics.
My guess is that there is going to be very few O_ATOMIC users anyway,
and they'll very carefully set it once and test it (or not even test
it - just make it be a configuration flag and tell people "don't ask
for O_ATOMIC if your system doesn't support it")
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-30 19:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-30 16:33 RFC: reject unknown open flags Christoph Hellwig
2017-03-30 16:33 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-03-30 16:33 ` [PATCH 1/2] fs: add a VALID_OPEN_FLAGS Christoph Hellwig
2017-03-30 16:33 ` [PATCH 2/2] fs: reject unknown open flags Christoph Hellwig
2017-03-30 17:03 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-03-30 17:03 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-03-30 17:08 ` RFC: " Linus Torvalds
2017-03-30 17:08 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-03-30 17:21 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-03-30 17:21 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-03-30 18:19 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-03-30 18:19 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-03-30 18:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-03-30 18:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-03-30 18:45 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-03-30 18:45 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-03-30 20:05 ` Boaz Harrosh
2017-03-30 19:02 ` Paul Eggert
2017-03-30 19:14 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2017-03-30 19:22 ` Florian Weimer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CA+55aFyKLCCe2OFCnyLYPDMT+DNWhYRQiLwFx1UU1+sf9w3oKA@mail.gmail.com \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=eggert@cs.ucla.edu \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.