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 picard.linux.it (picard.linux.it [213.254.12.146]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 62AC4C43334 for ; Mon, 25 Jul 2022 08:52:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D0B23C0E6F for ; Mon, 25 Jul 2022 10:52:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: from in-7.smtp.seeweb.it (in-7.smtp.seeweb.it [217.194.8.7]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-384)) (No client certificate requested) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B21E03C0E6F for ; Mon, 25 Jul 2022 10:52:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [IPv6:2001:67c:2178:6::1c]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by in-7.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8BDD12005D0 for ; Mon, 25 Jul 2022 10:52:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 59063378DA; Mon, 25 Jul 2022 08:52:36 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1658739156; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=X3kCs4LtU1ddF3bWU4opilwIK3233apXGjPq+QPIECs=; b=CCWuNgdLJH1foUpm4nnhp6/EuMqCGVTP7vw0OWartnZREgctqH2KsJw6STPl//txZyPPCE d44MFdn5E2dK/dIcrVYsIsEnc0GCGTkhOjLDmmdpSPnqrRkIEDckmJaRO6FmL/Zq0JaqCm A2F5qf2wsC0R8f9gNT04lQW5mIjEcg0= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1658739156; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=X3kCs4LtU1ddF3bWU4opilwIK3233apXGjPq+QPIECs=; b=Eag04g5sVG2rFalPuWKWakaQEnYT3QtwEhInKLHXTmqEJp1CeD+qr9onbCfK798E20znSf 1wehpWcekxevmtDA== Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 09EE713ABB; Mon, 25 Jul 2022 08:52:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id dNWMANRZ3mLzfgAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Mon, 25 Jul 2022 08:52:36 +0000 Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2022 10:52:34 +0200 From: Petr Vorel To: Cyril Hrubis Message-ID: References: <20220715062519.2480-1-chenhx.fnst@fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.102.4 at in-7.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] mount03: Convert to new API X-BeenThere: ltp@lists.linux.it X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux Test Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Petr Vorel Cc: Richard Palethorpe , "ltp@lists.linux.it" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-bounces+ltp=archiver.kernel.org@lists.linux.it Sender: "ltp" > Hi! > > @Richie @Li @Metan: There are checkpatch.pl warnings. Yes, kernel folks does not > > like permission warnings. Do we want to follow? Or should we remove these from > > our checkpatch.pl fork (we use constants in many places)? > > $ make check-mount03 > > mount03.c:29: WARNING: Symbolic permissions 'S_IRUSR|S_IWUSR|S_IRGRP|S_IROTH' are not preferred. Consider using octal permissions '0644'. > > mount03.c:30: WARNING: Symbolic permissions 'S_IRUSR|S_IXUSR|S_IXGRP|S_IXOTH' are not preferred. Consider using octal permissions '0511'. > > mount03.c:50: WARNING: static char array declaration should probably be static const char > > mount03.c:103: WARNING: Symbolic permissions 'S_IRWXU' are not preferred. Consider using octal permissions '0700'. > > mount03.c:114: WARNING: Symbolic permissions 'S_IRWXU' are not preferred. Consider using octal permissions '0700'. > > mount03.c:125: WARNING: Symbolic permissions 'S_IRWXU' are not preferred. Consider using octal permissions '0700'. > > mount03.c:181: WARNING: Symbolic permissions 'S_IRWXU' are not preferred. Consider using octal permissions '0700'. > > mount03.c:204: WARNING: Symbolic permissions 'S_IRWXU' are not preferred. Consider using octal permissions '0700'. > To be honest I think Linus is right at this one, the single octal number > is way more readable than the bitwise or of four constants, so I would > be inclined to start following the kernel practice here. Agree with the rule, numbers are indeed much readable and I'm for using it in LTP source. My concern was different: aren't these constants part of POSIX? See man from from 1997 [1]. There might be a test for these constants but it has much lower priority than tests for new kernel functionality and CVE. Kind regards, Petr [1] https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007908799/xsh/sysstat.h.html -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp