From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
To: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc: Christian Brauner <christian@brauner.io>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-api <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] uapi, vfs: Change the mount API UAPI [ver #2]
Date: Fri, 17 May 2019 09:25:21 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJfpegu0Ckc9tvuPKGtf1mrfj3mLmgw_gcJER9yyRLre4iwZiw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <11455.1558077206@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 9:13 AM David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Christian Brauner <christian@brauner.io> 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.
>
> They don't all have the same value (see OPEN_TREE_CLOEXEC).
>
> 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. 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.
>
> 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.
+1.
Confusion caused by inconsistency of naming is going to hurt more than
inconsistency of semantics wrt. open(2).
Thanks,
Miklos
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-05-17 7:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-05-16 11:52 [PATCH 0/4] uapi, vfs: Change the mount API UAPI [ver #2] David Howells
2019-05-16 11:52 ` [PATCH 1/4] uapi, fs: make all new mount api fds cloexec by default " David Howells
2019-05-16 11:52 ` [PATCH 2/4] uapi, fsopen: use square brackets around "fscontext" " David Howells
2019-05-16 11:52 ` [PATCH 3/4] uapi, x86: Fix the syscall numbering of the mount API syscalls " David Howells
2019-05-16 13:01 ` Christian Brauner
2019-05-16 11:52 ` [PATCH 4/4] uapi: Wire up the mount API syscalls on non-x86 arches " David Howells
2019-05-16 13:01 ` Christian Brauner
2019-05-16 14:56 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-05-16 14:59 ` Christian Brauner
2019-05-16 16:22 ` [PATCH 0/4] uapi, vfs: Change the mount API UAPI " Al Viro
2019-05-16 16:31 ` Al Viro
2019-05-16 16:31 ` Christian Brauner
2019-05-16 16:50 ` Al Viro
2019-05-16 17:01 ` Christian Brauner
2019-05-16 20:23 ` Dmitry V. Levin
2019-05-17 6:54 ` Christian Brauner
2019-05-17 7:01 ` Christian Brauner
2019-05-17 7:13 ` David Howells
2019-05-17 7:25 ` Miklos Szeredi [this message]
2019-05-17 7:27 ` Christian Brauner
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=CAJfpegu0Ckc9tvuPKGtf1mrfj3mLmgw_gcJER9yyRLre4iwZiw@mail.gmail.com \
--to=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=christian@brauner.io \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).