From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14904C04AB4 for ; Fri, 17 May 2019 07:27:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9ED5206A3 for ; Fri, 17 May 2019 07:27:29 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=brauner.io header.i=@brauner.io header.b="gd4ihdIX" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727588AbfEQH10 (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 May 2019 03:27:26 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-f65.google.com ([209.85.221.65]:38843 "EHLO mail-wr1-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728235AbfEQH1Z (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 May 2019 03:27:25 -0400 Received: by mail-wr1-f65.google.com with SMTP id d18so5947563wrs.5 for ; Fri, 17 May 2019 00:27:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=brauner.io; s=google; h=date:user-agent:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding:subject:to:cc:from:message-id; bh=vTuqweVxGrMZpBGY8BN5XjnYyQGBYldr7Afqqc1LBhA=; b=gd4ihdIX6mX+rvFOVH8yz9+aQdPiPDXRPyGcygBqrDuJPwSH7TN47DMl+ER/tOGyUu xlyeywivHbLoa5xLrBhehckK9F+kKqwmeyb4EAZhUHxr2IXUzGnqN6ZesiBIniD6UiYO fYiw4LhVzsq7VkATQTviyydJSSmR99+2Vztmr4mkq7vjs+V954+L5HAp+Qk+FH3T8Pdl vu3JmTTzSUe6qQo4TffL8iJiaiFOEgGPp1kGOVblJcIyWdgM0xUDvde6K6+e4FN6mOk3 gdM5vkVzKMUG5dpI3GdBQhdsdVfMqE6HcV4dylRxfvTU1LNMessVH2LAmBI/kYFH50rq 4UlA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:user-agent:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:subject:to:cc:from :message-id; bh=vTuqweVxGrMZpBGY8BN5XjnYyQGBYldr7Afqqc1LBhA=; b=QepCwD5WoPfVe0+vp5qCvU788roZT4KEVsUSg259eOo35g7O6cLbFTIwRMeL0+0PVG bJ+/R7HR6w8G9sUYHS4cyxidD0L+urwBc2ad++TzS5CoqjO2q6V4h6UHcdbmxPGZ+pc6 uVlZMgUQUB9TuG5qbbeo5Et4nkpYh4f2pEKP4cyK2vZGBD270NuvkhpGpdY3f2vbV/xO EAKydXx/e3Fl3i81S2ye1HBe/GR+eyNbPBD+jjVfV+0HVDr/XT3uHsbDepBU8sYuA7lo GIV2CuBIKhJPsBnUDVwvaxyd3rivIQf587WuzVfAgbGAzKKlU/1vPQifCYbIxbEqplR7 aq6A== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWub2RYWPSs6uReLzwT2wKXz54iiYggqyEY77ICb5vu+S84Gq24 BweAjLrKNpiFGDXX/koB0WX2kw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxERZsLWFWop9ybQ/EYVH2Iu9qtuOGzCe7d0WdsYyW3c/Na9+Naf3jGBVUUzB8iDnnSnBJN2A== X-Received: by 2002:adf:83c5:: with SMTP id 63mr4523188wre.33.1558078043966; Fri, 17 May 2019 00:27:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.18.135.95] ([46.183.103.8]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c131sm8613450wma.31.2019.05.17.00.27.23 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 17 May 2019 00:27:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 17 May 2019 09:27:14 +0200 User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android In-Reply-To: <11455.1558077206@warthog.procyon.org.uk> References: <155800752418.4037.9567789434648701032.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <20190516162259.GB17978@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20190516163151.urrmrueugockxtdy@brauner.io> <20190516165021.GD17978@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <11455.1558077206@warthog.procyon.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] uapi, vfs: Change the mount API UAPI [ver #2] To: David Howells CC: dhowells@redhat.com, Al Viro , torvalds@linux-foundation.org, Arnd Bergmann , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-api From: Christian Brauner Message-ID: <16C5B24F-2D1B-4AD3-BFEC-38BE8FE6AE1A@brauner.io> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org On May 17, 2019 9:13:26 AM GMT+02:00, David Howells = wrote: >Christian Brauner wrote: > >> If you still prefer to have cloexec flags >> for the 4 new syscalls then yes, >> if they could at least all have the same name >> (FSMOUNT_CLOEXEC?) that would be good=2E > >They don't all have the same value (see OPEN_TREE_CLOEXEC)=2E > >Note that I also don't want to blindly #define them to O_CLOEXEC >because it's >not necessarily the same value on all arches=2E Currently it can be >02000000, >010000000 or 0x400000 for instance, which means that if it's sharing a >mask >with other flags, at least three bits have to be reserved for it or we >have to >have arch-dependent bit juggling=2E Ugh=2E Right, I forgot about that entirely=2E Christian > >One thing I like about your approach of just making them O_CLOEXEC by >default >and removing the constants is that it avoids this mess entirely=2E > >David