From: Ned Ulbricht <nedu@netscape.net>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@orcam.me.uk>
Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>,
Maarten Brock <Maarten.Brock@sttls.nl>,
"linux-serial@vger.kernel.org" <linux-serial@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-api@vger.kernel.org" <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: RFC: Serial port DTR/RTS - O_<something>
Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2025 13:29:00 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6c26eea2-6f90-f48a-9488-e7480f086c70@netscape.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <B72D6F71-7C0B-4C5A-8866-25D7946E0932@zytor.com>
On 11/14/25 10:53, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On November 14, 2025 10:49:09 AM PST, "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@orcam.me.uk> wrote:
>> On Thu, 13 Nov 2025, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>>
>>>> I think this is going to be the most difficult. I don't remember why I
>>>> rejected the old submission, but maybe it would have modified the
>>>> existing behaviour? A new open flag "O_DO_NOT_TOUCH_ANYTHING" might be
>>>> the simplest?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Okay, to I'm going to toss out a couple suggestions for naming:
>>>
>>> O_(PRE|FOR|N|NO)?(INIT|CONFIG|START)(DEV|HW|IO)?
>>> O_(NO?RESET|PREPARE)(DEV|HW|IO)?
>>> O_NO?TOUCH
>>> O_NYET ("not yet")
>>>
>>> I think my personal preference at the moment is either O_NYET or O_PRECONFIG
>>> or O_NYET; although it is perhaps a bit more "use case centric" than "what
>>> actual effect it has" I think it might be clearer. A -DEV, -HW or -IO suffix
>>> would seem to needlessly preclude it being used for future similar use cases
>>> for files that are not device nodes.
>>
>> Hmm, I'm inconvinced about any of these.
>>
>> How about O_FDONLY, to reflect that you are after a file descriptor only [snip]
Hi all,
Resurrecting a (private email) discussion from a few years back now, my
personal preferences are:
(1) O_KEEP
(2) O_TTY_KEEP
(3) O_TTY_NOINIT.
(Of course, naming an open() flag has got to be a paradigmatic
invitation for bike-shedding...)
It's worth pointing out, though, that even though O_TTY_INIT doesn't
generally appear in linux headers, that particular flag is documented in
POSIX to have at least incompatible --perhaps even strictly opposite--
behavior compared with this new proposed flag.
See The Open Group Base Specifications Issue 8 (IEEE Std 1003.1-2024):
| 11.1.1 Opening a Terminal Device File
|
| 3. ... The terminal parameters can be set to values that ensure the
| terminal behaves in a conforming manner by means of the O_TTY_INIT
| open flag....
https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9799919799/basedefs/V1_chap11.html
| open, openat — open file
|
| O_TTY_INIT
https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9799919799/
That's what motivates my first-glance preference to name this new flag,
which will have approximately opposite behavior, as O_TTY_NOINIT.
But as a generic abstraction, I more prefer O_KEEP.
Ned
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-15 22:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-11-07 7:53 RFC: Serial port DTR/RTS - O_NRESETDEV H. Peter Anvin
2025-11-07 17:37 ` Theodore Ts'o
2025-11-09 2:25 ` H. Peter Anvin
2025-11-10 3:35 ` Theodore Ts'o
2025-11-10 5:00 ` H. Peter Anvin
2025-11-10 10:06 ` Maarten Brock
2025-11-10 20:19 ` Theodore Ts'o
2025-11-10 21:05 ` H. Peter Anvin
2025-11-11 3:51 ` Theodore Ts'o
2025-11-11 3:57 ` H. Peter Anvin
2025-11-11 4:38 ` Theodore Ts'o
2025-11-11 10:21 ` Maarten Brock
2025-11-11 21:28 ` H. Peter Anvin
2025-11-12 11:22 ` Greg KH
2025-11-12 16:09 ` H. Peter Anvin
2025-11-12 16:46 ` Greg KH
2025-11-12 19:12 ` H. Peter Anvin
2025-11-12 19:39 ` Greg KH
2025-11-12 19:53 ` H. Peter Anvin
2025-11-12 19:55 ` H. Peter Anvin
2025-11-13 22:24 ` RFC: Serial port DTR/RTS - O_<something> H. Peter Anvin
2025-11-14 10:26 ` Maarten Brock
2025-11-14 18:49 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2025-11-14 18:53 ` H. Peter Anvin
2025-11-15 21:29 ` Ned Ulbricht [this message]
2025-11-15 22:29 ` H. Peter Anvin
2025-11-16 0:47 ` H. Peter Anvin
2025-11-18 16:33 ` Ned Ulbricht
2025-11-18 17:31 ` H. Peter Anvin
2025-11-18 18:05 ` H. Peter Anvin
2025-11-20 13:31 ` Ned Ulbricht
2025-11-10 5:20 ` RFC: Serial port DTR/RTS - O_NRESETDEV H. Peter Anvin
2025-11-09 20:43 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
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=6c26eea2-6f90-f48a-9488-e7480f086c70@netscape.net \
--to=nedu@netscape.net \
--cc=Maarten.Brock@sttls.nl \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-serial@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=macro@orcam.me.uk \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).