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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3717C6FD18 for ; Tue, 18 Apr 2023 14:37:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231384AbjDROhZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Apr 2023 10:37:25 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:42178 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230307AbjDROhY (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Apr 2023 10:37:24 -0400 Received: from mail-wm1-x336.google.com (mail-wm1-x336.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::336]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E1FC86A63 for ; Tue, 18 Apr 2023 07:37:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm1-x336.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-3f1728c2a57so19633235e9.0 for ; Tue, 18 Apr 2023 07:37:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1681828641; x=1684420641; h=in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to:content-language:subject :user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=soDgPH0arS5AayIBPVM3DxZxHMoEDHGVCfYWrx2ZCig=; b=eFSvlmIN/fXT1xlgsMECCdEhhPVLAgD7rycn2Q27MsWyqS9conlIQbegc+wuz0Qnas vaDdH6V8ASdOqu30SE9G09ppxIXTLazFu/OH5TWtccoCWTVtjd0iBSJrbs/uz6EC7ZDY aZjLLUy1BpjyR4WqDsjL0hiWDOwOcEVyHfD5qzuLJ/G98w+0M3euE6etZ6gCUdA1XkCc qgty/DW23Mzu2vihquhA1s0AC5gbaxiHrva5+HydMhxNe/1IkSGCVLUI1voU4AFvE5SS BYDJbohkh2fOcSyZmJQhOw53D1WvVUCBXiRt8xwwuBXvWwb4a4P7tUaIiHvPJzuRR6I1 x1rw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1681828641; x=1684420641; h=in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to:content-language:subject :user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id:x-gm-message-state:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=soDgPH0arS5AayIBPVM3DxZxHMoEDHGVCfYWrx2ZCig=; b=Oo+eD6BZG692q1krYruMzJPCYQCHb+UB0TE3HeUhMDdfjWSG3Zxeq9yIfDPh6Rb30/ FoAYXOcQVQtMfW38OyFGyLnzO3ugf8AxwT2FGtdrYuv9cOik8NkeDCOlzpEVl+Q3cyEb 3sAHrQGduFUF5SISA3FepAdDghTzJMweQX/HfPXWJhufMTR7hq65VGLNy82XXV6yd8Ih +2v8Rf70FMK5MMP2CrJ6NnHZuC2xHftc4N7PaNjtiGn9tRYbxvRVjM6s+xylNX1UktBU 1EMEbl5g2WseMGq3LtbX+MJJX59808lVP4tOjyEl0Sr0ZGDjNJOyZ42al0+ntQlZLFtq cDAA== X-Gm-Message-State: AAQBX9cVXMa10+y07wbdqcpPX8tgq5E5y56oz/ofj+jx/b4egun0wKU3 QqIoWO3nuHHnIjXqiQFcSZk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AKy350a551RuZL7gXiuTjKAaF5T6Mn2nyMKLwskeT0Q8TuoWyQ362T0OeEoxz1OGRqYbM1xqaKrVMA== X-Received: by 2002:adf:d84e:0:b0:2e2:730a:c7dc with SMTP id k14-20020adfd84e000000b002e2730ac7dcmr1886857wrl.25.1681828641348; Tue, 18 Apr 2023 07:37:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.160] ([170.253.51.134]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k14-20020a5d66ce000000b002f103ca90cdsm13329319wrw.101.2023.04.18.07.37.20 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 18 Apr 2023 07:37:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2023 16:37:13 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.9.1 Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/1] landlock.7: Explain the best-effort fallback mechanism in the example Content-Language: en-US To: =?UTF-8?Q?Micka=c3=abl_Sala=c3=bcn?= , =?UTF-8?Q?G=c3=bcnther_Noack?= Cc: linux-man@vger.kernel.org References: <20230414155926.6937-1-gnoack3000@gmail.com> <20230414155926.6937-2-gnoack3000@gmail.com> <20230415.de079bcd1e29@gnoack.org> <31ecebc5-1b97-b610-a097-f260ec4d4c8d@gmail.com> From: Alejandro Colomar In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------zwKJrGSrQvHkjOIPi34UO0Y5" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-man@vger.kernel.org This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --------------zwKJrGSrQvHkjOIPi34UO0Y5 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------9zoKx40zOvy7YNkAbpEEkuxi"; protected-headers="v1" From: Alejandro Colomar To: =?UTF-8?Q?Micka=c3=abl_Sala=c3=bcn?= , =?UTF-8?Q?G=c3=bcnther_Noack?= Cc: linux-man@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/1] landlock.7: Explain the best-effort fallback mechanism in the example References: <20230414155926.6937-1-gnoack3000@gmail.com> <20230414155926.6937-2-gnoack3000@gmail.com> <20230415.de079bcd1e29@gnoack.org> <31ecebc5-1b97-b610-a097-f260ec4d4c8d@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: --------------9zoKx40zOvy7YNkAbpEEkuxi Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Micka=C3=ABl, On 4/17/23 22:54, Micka=C3=ABl Sala=C3=BCn wrote: >>>> BTW, now I checked that while in Linux ENOTSUP and EOPNOTSUPP are >>>> equivalent, in POSIX the latter has a connotation that it's about >=20 > For Linux: > #define EOPNOTSUPP 95 /* Operation not supported on transport endpoint = */ > #define ENOTSUPP 524 /* Operation is not supported */ $ errno 95 EOPNOTSUPP 95 Operation not supported $ errno 524 $ echo $? 1 $ grepc -k ENOTSUP /usr/include/ /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/errno.h:30:# define ENOTSUP EOPNOTSU= PP $ grepc -k ENOTSUPP /usr/include/ $ grepc -k EOPNOTSUPP /usr/include/ /usr/include/asm-generic/errno.h:78:#define EOPNOTSUPP 95 /* Operation no= t supported on transport endpoint */ Is ENOTSUPP a kernel thing? User space we doesn't seem to agree with that :). I'm on Debian Sid. Indeed, it seems a kernel thing: $ man -Kaw ENOTSUPP /usr/local/man/man1/checkpatch.1 That page is one I wrote extracting info from checkpatch.rst. It seems checkpatch.pl warns about use of ENOTSUPP. >=20 > EOPNOTSUPP is not only used for network error, but to identify generic = > unsupported operations, while ENOTSUPP was initially dedicated to NFS=20 > error (but now also slipped to other areas) >=20 >>>> sockets. Should we document ENOTSUP in landlock_create_ruleset(2) >>>> instead of EOPNOTSUPP? >> >>> EOPNOTSUP is also used in Landlock's kernel documentation, >>> we'd maybe have to update it there as well. >>> I'll have a look at what is more common. >> >> Thanks. In the man pages I see both often, so maybe we need to fix >> consistency there too. >=20 > No, ENOTSUP*P* is not used by Landlock. But should it? I mean ENOTSUP, not ENOTSUPP. Cheers, Alex --=20 GPG key fingerprint: A9348594CE31283A826FBDD8D57633D441E25BB5 --------------9zoKx40zOvy7YNkAbpEEkuxi-- --------------zwKJrGSrQvHkjOIPi34UO0Y5 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="OpenPGP_signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="OpenPGP_signature" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEE6jqH8KTroDDkXfJAnowa+77/2zIFAmQ+qxoACgkQnowa+77/ 2zIQzw/9HMJYdfMeqsZM9DJvwPK+ybrZQG5UliL35s/2lRwqtnZY4sd/L+Z4C1ip KhD6uzAtR4fNtpCvyMQ8e+WUCODf0vFsv1XAII6GuJavyShxB+tPETAEvB6jDbep EnJrv7kTXWS7kif4B+3KGy3TeibnKAy6s9Wf+yxJdqhhIVs1+CIVxOdrf/+IxHh0 NXKVGjQ4rpQoqxvgxkVI6xFdo4NaqabR4ARz7ynpdSJuGsmx8RxKENCc3kGO0Br+ V5rOxDRV1lqdETBGJ0HsnDHDx4wA2wiaWBImdWD7iJkm1ZBPny253jAxjY7eBtVx NZhJqzpHlUBaYQCbkl4i70A01uPXtKqWfjcjSLAnwh3k61Tds12s9IovkAyKMD+r 2YrbZDsosmdMeW7QuWa89ek1vNjn9+0eqgstoK1w2Cm3ypXi+Wy6fhLt9BiO1FoB UxDEd9Ma9SB3UKynuEZA1hH3qw2epqk7Rh2Y3g4qRIULj0FsyyUothYVeqbWZjFE 2YopQf3kH2r3LE3Eblub1t8T5R92RmkZ39sxgG9kBxdXd2MZWHcyrgngxZfcs3dy SV/tANFoOXyXo8dGow0iHGMtXC1+DmTIFmH4QVHl7Cr/c+qDniOkpKlnQpquD+4a zDS8zfCzYkFzB681NLeX9VHc31qdju0fDP/uWvHL/kGcnpDhsXU= =St6D -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------zwKJrGSrQvHkjOIPi34UO0Y5--