LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Yury Norov <ynorov@caviumnetworks.com>
To: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org,
	Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-api@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add renameat2 function [BZ #17662]
Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2018 11:46:22 +0300
Message-ID: <20180702084622.GA15274@yury-thinkpad> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <60505ccf-a399-6320-74f5-e2e17965d25c@redhat.com>

+ Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, kernel maillists. 

On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 08:48:36AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 07/01/2018 11:49 PM, Yury Norov wrote:
> 
> > > +#ifdef __USE_GNU
> > > +/* Flags for renameat.  */
> > 
> > Flags for renameat2, right?
> 
> Thanks, fixed.
> 
> > > +# define RENAME_NOREPLACE (1 << 0)
> > > +# define RENAME_EXCHANGE (1 << 1)
> > > +# define RENAME_WHITEOUT (1 << 2)
> > 
> > I really don't understand how it works. Could you / somebody explain me?
> > 
> > include/uapi/linux/fs.h in kernel sources already defines this flags,
> > and this file is usually available in Linux distribution. So I don't
> > understand what for it is duplicated here. If you keep in mind
> > old linux headers or non-linux systems, I think it should be protected
> > with #ifndef guards.
> 
> <linux/fs.h> undefines and defines macros not mentioned in the standards
> (and it even contains a few unrelated structs), so we cannot include it
> without _GNU_SOURCE.
> 
> It might be possible to include it only for _GNU_SOURCE, but there are a
> lot of things in <linux/fs.h>, so that does not seem to be particularly
> advisable.
> 
> We still support building glibc with 3.2 kernel headers, and if the
> definitions you quoted above are not available, building the test case
> would fail.

Is my understanding correct that glibc community finds <linux/fs.h>
inappropriate for their use, and prefer to re-introduce (duplicate)
its functionality locally? I think it's wrong. The right way to go
is to make kernel headers comfortable for users instead of ignoring
it.

Are you OK to switch to kernel RENAME_* definitions if they will be
located in separated small file? Like in the patch below.

Signed-off-by: Yury Norov <ynorov@caviumnetworks.com>
---
 include/uapi/linux/fs.h     |  4 +---
 include/uapi/linux/rename.h | 12 ++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 include/uapi/linux/rename.h

diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/fs.h b/include/uapi/linux/fs.h
index c27576d471c2..46c03ea31a76 100644
--- a/include/uapi/linux/fs.h
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/fs.h
@@ -44,9 +44,7 @@
 #define SEEK_HOLE	4	/* seek to the next hole */
 #define SEEK_MAX	SEEK_HOLE
 
-#define RENAME_NOREPLACE	(1 << 0)	/* Don't overwrite target */
-#define RENAME_EXCHANGE		(1 << 1)	/* Exchange source and dest */
-#define RENAME_WHITEOUT		(1 << 2)	/* Whiteout source */
+#include <linux/rename.h>
 
 struct file_clone_range {
 	__s64 src_fd;
diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/rename.h b/include/uapi/linux/rename.h
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..7178f0565657
--- /dev/null
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/rename.h
@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
+/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note */
+#ifndef _UAPI_LINUX_RENAME_H
+#define _UAPI_LINUX_RENAME_H
+
+/*
+ * Definitions for rename syscall family.
+ */
+#define RENAME_NOREPLACE	(1 << 0)	/* Don't overwrite target */
+#define RENAME_EXCHANGE		(1 << 1)	/* Exchange source and dest */
+#define RENAME_WHITEOUT		(1 << 2)	/* Whiteout source */
+
+#endif /* _UAPI_LINUX_RENAME_H */
-- 
2.17.1


       reply index

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20180630121447.E4C8643994575@oldenburg.str.redhat.com>
     [not found] ` <20180701214901.GA32498@yury-thinkpad>
     [not found]   ` <60505ccf-a399-6320-74f5-e2e17965d25c@redhat.com>
2018-07-02  8:46     ` Yury Norov [this message]
2018-07-02  9:32       ` 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=20180702084622.GA15274@yury-thinkpad \
    --to=ynorov@caviumnetworks.com \
    --cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
    --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

LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/0 lkml/git/0.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1 lkml/git/1.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/2 lkml/git/2.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/3 lkml/git/3.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/4 lkml/git/4.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/5 lkml/git/5.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/6 lkml/git/6.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/7 lkml/git/7.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/8 lkml/git/8.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/9 lkml/git/9.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 lkml lkml/ https://lore.kernel.org/lkml \
		linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index lkml

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git