From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 36E962F49F8 for ; Fri, 5 Sep 2025 07:19:50 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757056792; cv=none; b=KHplL9p4gHQ7gaM7Zj2+P5jKC3TEShEJeQc4TtBTEOcwUwB05AeyAHPeIt9RxH6J/jvdwUThJdfqAq6gqY6muG5d+RzOZyn5T8ZT42NJvoPKiEGiCXkfES3h3TKkA/Tgq6FsM0iZuvIEI3U0fiCFALBUkEoiFhhTAQ0LZG42DR0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757056792; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Suw09eB9ppiB6UfNyAOxsVIseQRG6XKcK1nA3C87n6s=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=mwMQcR5DHcJvNvtMb9dpCFOaZfQyK1NgORw1GgbqxCyVmmdJAYwDOYra0dSqLBq8z3fsa02bpJKjVzbSiPhXwjALkyzlIeF3faTQPfsUZ8R56IV+/8qtHOdBV9uYhOrZUTap8q3gMdtm9zQaXVM+aFxwmYRPuuLZzOnWPaFf44U= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=BmlbqCor; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="BmlbqCor" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1757056790; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject: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=lOWBvlmAC8pfNTMOXHdIcb1vSYRLonZ1V+4KR+bduoU=; b=BmlbqCorFw7lXtWo5sQBr/0CqXsNn6+FRHPaVKusSLOxggmllTI3E90IZB+yHI34tB8kjp LKX3nNgNccvrQI7U7HBswj/M2x/XRcB0C6sTSfvo+PyL2gHdKzdYg9Xo9N5FJ71bbCAY5Q 1Gk8zmEuet16baap5GuOxapX2o821dM= Received: from mx-prod-mc-02.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-54-186-198-63.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [54.186.198.63]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-50-Y2iy0qCyNs-1PW5mQz-4kA-1; Fri, 05 Sep 2025 03:19:43 -0400 X-MC-Unique: Y2iy0qCyNs-1PW5mQz-4kA-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: Y2iy0qCyNs-1PW5mQz-4kA_1757056781 Received: from mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.12]) (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 mx-prod-mc-02.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D9AB195608E; Fri, 5 Sep 2025 07:19:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fweimer-oldenburg.csb.redhat.com (unknown [10.45.224.104]) by mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AD9F419560B8; Fri, 5 Sep 2025 07:19:36 +0000 (UTC) From: Florian Weimer To: Randy Dunlap Cc: Amir Goldstein , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, patches@lists.linux.dev, Jeff Layton , Chuck Lever , Alexander Aring , Josef Bacik , Aleksa Sarai , Jan Kara , Christian Brauner , Matthew Wilcox , David Howells , linux-api@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] uapi/linux/fcntl: remove AT_RENAME* macros In-Reply-To: (Randy Dunlap's message of "Thu, 4 Sep 2025 14:52:34 -0700") References: <20250904062215.2362311-1-rdunlap@infradead.org> Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2025 09:19:33 +0200 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-api@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.0 on 10.30.177.12 * Randy Dunlap: > On 9/4/25 11:49 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: >> * Amir Goldstein: >> >>> I find this end result a bit odd, but I don't want to suggest another variant >>> I already proposed one in v2 review [1] that maybe you did not like. >>> It's fine. >>> I'll let Aleksa and Christian chime in to decide on if and how they want this >>> comment to look or if we should just delete these definitions and be done with >>> this episode. >> >> We should fix the definition in glibc to be identical token-wise to the >> kernel's. > > That's probably a good suggestion... > while I tried the reverse of that and Amir opposed. It's certainly odd that the kernel uses different token sequences for defining AT_RENAME_* and RENAME_*. But it's probably too late to fix that. Here's the glibc patch: [PATCH] libio: Define AT_RENAME_* with the same tokens as Linux Thanks, Florian