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=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham 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 2DD09C04AAF for ; Thu, 16 May 2019 16:23:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AEE42082E for ; Thu, 16 May 2019 16:23:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727001AbfEPQXE (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 May 2019 12:23:04 -0400 Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:58972 "EHLO ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726494AbfEPQXD (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 May 2019 12:23:03 -0400 Received: from viro by ZenIV.linux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.92 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1hRJ9n-0003Q5-Hd; Thu, 16 May 2019 16:22:59 +0000 Date: Thu, 16 May 2019 17:22:59 +0100 From: Al Viro To: David Howells Cc: torvalds@linux-foundation.org, Christian Brauner , Arnd Bergmann , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] uapi, vfs: Change the mount API UAPI [ver #2] Message-ID: <20190516162259.GB17978@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <155800752418.4037.9567789434648701032.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <155800752418.4037.9567789434648701032.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.3 (2019-02-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 12:52:04PM +0100, David Howells wrote: > > Hi Linus, Al, > > Here are some patches that make changes to the mount API UAPI and two of > them really need applying, before -rc1 - if they're going to be applied at > all. I'm fine with 2--4, but I'm not convinced that cloexec-by-default crusade makes any sense. Could somebody give coherent arguments in favour of abandoning the existing conventions?