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 908792505A5 for ; Thu, 4 Sep 2025 18:49:28 +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=1757011771; cv=none; b=q00RPfJeC249t20pTft0q9fgQwfhwavdXr3RoVLFhtGy9FDP3v12vHbpDVSASSUSx7OMBZI/QLdehdQ0L8fX/v6V1NpdVimDYAKU7uC9cfGYd83PB+PBBLOdeF2atvCM2UICho3l6K/SrXm8gCfAaYZEHOGf0XJTjkZl/sXEn90= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757011771; c=relaxed/simple; bh=eXyQJfESFf7Aw5FLo55Mg6bEf+xMsXf9uIP9sy2EQtE=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=NlAcUUZw8kpC5XTUj6jnc6N6SyJUK6V7eTp8A1vMp8Qy9Ok3ao6PdmJaKvMFOu1IjzaCKN/Sa2rBrWklyFODLKsbyVR8CjTmH6Spzhoa71kMt7dOblD/N6d/JvnDfHBY7sbJn3yVddIe6CSYh6WvufEulR3ROtZB/rqAeiVxOA4= 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=Kx4NOG4B; 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="Kx4NOG4B" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1757011767; 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=eXyQJfESFf7Aw5FLo55Mg6bEf+xMsXf9uIP9sy2EQtE=; b=Kx4NOG4BdgzDhhNVKQwp2KLL21g/pvlVEq2nNoqHUkZVUkZ/19DiR7xzgQPxlyoqIr29X9 X0fkEKLy/DDsYkX8dWnRGi0xZG4HIDTqH/i/N5HJ4p92TQArIxk0N72dsWjoyohT09MZM2 nQmUB7BCRjo1ECMTZu7eukmExJl7Ck4= Received: from mx-prod-mc-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-35-165-154-97.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [35.165.154.97]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-516-3A5xmutrNkSXJHhPd00MnQ-1; Thu, 04 Sep 2025 14:49:24 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 3A5xmutrNkSXJHhPd00MnQ-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: 3A5xmutrNkSXJHhPd00MnQ_1757011762 Received: from mx-prod-int-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.4]) (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-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA0631800378; Thu, 4 Sep 2025 18:49:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fweimer-oldenburg.csb.redhat.com (unknown [10.45.224.87]) by mx-prod-int-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7E9FF3002D27; Thu, 4 Sep 2025 18:49:16 +0000 (UTC) From: Florian Weimer To: Amir Goldstein Cc: Randy Dunlap , 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: (Amir Goldstein's message of "Thu, 4 Sep 2025 20:17:24 +0200") References: <20250904062215.2362311-1-rdunlap@infradead.org> Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2025 20:49:13 +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 3.4.1 on 10.30.177.4 * 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. Thanks, Florian