From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from ms.lwn.net (ms.lwn.net [45.79.88.28]) (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 642203644CC; Fri, 16 Jan 2026 19:27:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1768591648; cv=none; b=aropFfetvdXIR86ZBd6eKJkU7OXknDXUx3J3Oeygvzy8zjBLgwyNBPeHXAtennK8rdp99ZoSW9N3gcuaI0yrncGVqF+bKCkebo9DpT4facQohpoTdGct4EJIjQlS0RAH4jUeq9/ShPBapKYadLrFSZNiJeroyTdPAakGwgUAbGk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1768591648; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Lp6ehBD3QHZJLR01CDWLGpcwUq3e5ShN7osXBR3t36E=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=A5Hcn+qvuknQLljSllER/LWxFhe+SmPqA56U4rDvkxrCTrXEjDTFmMT5mSyCatK3y+sO3mUXmZeX0B98rDiCqcar3zO9F90huj/p3NPkxgGDRTJpipA+G9szKNcfFPh2YjHnXFWh5d1j+TgHB6mm7jMaLHOUwlr91WgA2YpewiE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b=WgX6+imk; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b="WgX6+imk" DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 ms.lwn.net A727840425 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lwn.net; s=20201203; t=1768591646; bh=GrPaD38g+pXSIroomzoA1woRAXCB/+QRFuyOOw8Q+Xo=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=WgX6+imkwi9Q9XdI0xgLaU/fWn3FKexytNCwXuYeKdKdshizK8asLdbrvIibNbkkx KyAy8qbZqZcux5RWpaSEyC+l8peiy42BxVJB0Qg07DJUGMiIdKGIqhgGKsf+px3nIw WCMduRMXOTWKrDpPAi/KiYM5lQxfwP5LnxCq9ZBoCG9rZU31W5MnLknagr679iM4Pg 6N3CEsNYHQHLGuLMDbnZOPjUqh/E7gq4kGKNh2oyGwzpb/TZnZyXYXcoStsPwzPdr/ 2Df8JvupYOiMMmMXsBTu5m6QyGWzR+O6a0fiZtwv8GreJ1f6NZqQI2wU5+povUxxxn 0bQ5Tw1e9E74w== Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2601:280:4600:27b::1fe]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (prime256v1) server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ms.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A727840425; Fri, 16 Jan 2026 19:27:26 +0000 (UTC) From: Jonathan Corbet To: Randy Dunlap , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org Cc: Matthew Wilcox , Alexander Viro , Christian Brauner , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] docs: filesystems: add fs/open.c to api-summary In-Reply-To: References: <20260104204530.518206-1-rdunlap@infradead.org> <871pjpo0ya.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> <501f8b16-272b-4ea5-92ef-6bdb6f58f77b@infradead.org> Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2026 12:27:25 -0700 Message-ID: <87wm1hmk82.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Randy Dunlap writes: > Seems I was confused with fs/namei.c, where I see similar warnings. > I don't see those warnings in fs/open.c. > > I'm using today's linux-next tree, where the latest change to > fs/open.c is: > ommit 750d2f1f7b5c > Author: Al Viro > Date: Sun Dec 14 03:13:59 2025 -0500 > chroot(2): switch to CLASS(filename) > > Do you have something later (newer) than that? > > Also, at fs/open.c lines 1147-1157, I don't see anything that would > cause docs warnings. No, docs-next is older - based on -rc2. It seems that linux-next has significantly thrashed thing there, and the offending function (dentry_create()) moved to namei.c... jon