From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
To: Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
linux-api@vger.kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
metze@samba.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
cyphar@cyphar.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Have RESOLVE_* flags superseded AT_* flags for new syscalls?
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2020 13:42:50 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87y2sjlygl.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200302123510.bm3a2zssohwvkaa4@wittgenstein> (Christian Brauner's message of "Mon, 2 Mar 2020 13:35:10 +0100")
* Christian Brauner:
> One difference to openat() is that openat2() doesn't silently ignore
> unknown flags. But I'm not sure that would matter for iplementing
> openat() via openat2() since there are no flags that openat() knows about
> that openat2() doesn't know about afaict. So the only risks would be
> programs that accidently have a bit set that isn't used yet.
Will there be any new flags for openat in the future? If not, we can
just use a constant mask in an openat2-based implementation of openat.
Thanks,
Florian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-03-02 12:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-28 14:53 Have RESOLVE_* flags superseded AT_* flags for new syscalls? David Howells
2020-02-28 15:24 ` Christian Brauner
2020-02-29 15:26 ` Aleksa Sarai
2020-02-29 15:54 ` Aleksa Sarai
2020-03-01 16:46 ` Christian Brauner
2020-03-01 16:38 ` Christian Brauner
2020-03-02 11:30 ` Florian Weimer
2020-03-02 11:52 ` Christian Brauner
2020-03-02 12:05 ` Christian Brauner
2020-03-02 15:10 ` Christian Brauner
2020-03-02 15:36 ` Aleksa Sarai
2020-03-02 16:31 ` Christian Brauner
2020-03-02 12:09 ` Florian Weimer
2020-03-02 12:19 ` Christian Brauner
2020-03-02 12:35 ` Christian Brauner
2020-03-02 12:42 ` Florian Weimer [this message]
2020-03-02 12:55 ` Christian Brauner
2020-03-05 14:33 ` David Howells
2020-03-05 14:38 ` Florian Weimer
2020-03-05 14:43 ` David Howells
[not found] ` <20200305141154.e246swv62rnctite@yavin>
2020-03-05 15:23 ` Christian Brauner
2020-03-02 14:27 ` David Howells
2020-03-02 14:35 ` Christian Brauner
2020-03-02 14:50 ` David Howells
2020-03-02 15:05 ` Christian Brauner
2020-03-02 15:24 ` Aleksa Sarai
2020-03-02 16:37 ` David Howells
[not found] ` <20200306140032.tpwfytofaeuazalo@yavin>
2020-03-06 14:48 ` David Howells
2020-03-02 15:10 ` Aleksa Sarai
2020-03-02 15:23 ` David Howells
2020-03-02 14:30 ` David Howells
2020-03-02 15:04 ` Aleksa Sarai
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=87y2sjlygl.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com \
--to=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=christian.brauner@ubuntu.com \
--cc=cyphar@cyphar.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=metze@samba.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.