From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, libc-alpha@sourceware.org,
chrubis@suse.cz
Subject: Re: [Linux PATCH] fcntl: add new F_OFD_*32 constants and handle them appropriately
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 19:31:39 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160818173139.GA1140@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1471541300.2504.23.camel@redhat.com>
On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 01:28:20PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> That was my original thinking, but several people seemed to think that
> we should just go ahead and support it. TBH, I don't much care either
> way, but we either need to support it properly, or ensure that trying
> to use OFD locks in a non-LFS program fails to compile.
Yes, that's what glibc folks should do for now given that they still
seem to refuse being draggred into the present.
> The only real concern I have here is whether limiting this to LFS
> enabled programs might make it tougher to get this into POSIX. Would
> the POSIX standards folks object to having an interface like this that
> doesn't support non-LFS cases? I guess if that ever happens though,
> then we can just widen the support at that point.
LFS is perfectly Posix compliant (as is non-LFS). It's really just
a glibc (aka Linux) special to still support non-LFS modes. 4.4BSD
and decendants have made the switch to 64-bit off_t in 1994 and haven't
supported a non-LFS since.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-19 1:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-18 12:03 [Linux PATCH] fcntl: add new F_OFD_*32 constants and handle them appropriately Jeff Layton
2016-08-18 13:24 ` Cyril Hrubis
2016-08-18 13:54 ` Jeff Layton
2016-08-18 14:06 ` Cyril Hrubis
2016-08-18 17:05 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-08-18 17:28 ` Jeff Layton
2016-08-18 17:31 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2016-08-18 17:46 ` Mike Frysinger
2016-08-18 17:52 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-08-18 18:16 ` Mike Frysinger
2016-08-18 19:01 ` Zack Weinberg
2016-08-18 19:36 ` Paul Eggert
2016-08-19 13:20 ` Zack Weinberg
2016-08-19 15:02 ` Joseph Myers
2016-08-19 15:45 ` Zack Weinberg
2016-08-19 16:58 ` Joseph Myers
2016-08-19 19:50 ` Zack Weinberg
2016-08-18 20:52 ` Joseph Myers
2016-08-25 11:53 ` Florian Weimer
2016-08-25 12:05 ` Cyril Hrubis
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=20160818173139.GA1140@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=chrubis@suse.cz \
--cc=jlayton@redhat.com \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
/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).