From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Howells Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] uapi, vfs: Change the mount API UAPI [ver #2] Date: Fri, 17 May 2019 08:13:26 +0100 Message-ID: <11455.1558077206@warthog.procyon.org.uk> References: <155800752418.4037.9567789434648701032.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <20190516162259.GB17978@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20190516163151.urrmrueugockxtdy@brauner.io> <20190516165021.GD17978@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Return-path: In-Reply-To: Content-ID: <11454.1558077206.1@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Christian Brauner Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, Al Viro , torvalds@linux-foundation.org, Arnd Bergmann , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-api List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org Christian Brauner wrote: > If you still prefer to have cloexec flags > for the 4 new syscalls then yes, > if they could at least all have the same name > (FSMOUNT_CLOEXEC?) that would be good. They don't all have the same value (see OPEN_TREE_CLOEXEC). Note that I also don't want to blindly #define them to O_CLOEXEC because it's not necessarily the same value on all arches. Currently it can be 02000000, 010000000 or 0x400000 for instance, which means that if it's sharing a mask with other flags, at least three bits have to be reserved for it or we have to have arch-dependent bit juggling. One thing I like about your approach of just making them O_CLOEXEC by default and removing the constants is that it avoids this mess entirely. David