From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-xfs <linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org,
"linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
zhibli@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: reject MAP_SHARED_VALIDATE without new flags
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 19:10:51 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFzeA7N3evSF2jKHu8JoTQuKDLCMKx7RiPhmym97-8HY7A@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <60052659-7b37-cb69-bf9f-1683caa46219@redhat.com>
On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 6:45 PM Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Thus the invalid flag combination of (MAP_SHARED|MAP_PRIVATE) now
> passes without error, which is a regression.
It's not a regression, it's just new behavior.
"regression" doesn't mean "things changed". It means "something broke".
What broke?
Because if it's some manual page breakage, just fix the manual. That's
what "new behavior" is all about.
There is nothing that says that "MAP_SHARED_VALIDATE" can't work with
just the legacy flags.
Because I'd be worried about your patch breaking some actual new user
of MAP_SHARED_VALIDATE.
Because it's actual *users* of behavior we care about, not some
test-suite or manual pages.
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-06-28 2:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-06-28 1:45 [PATCH] mm: reject MAP_SHARED_VALIDATE without new flags Eric Sandeen
2018-06-28 2:10 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2018-06-28 2:17 ` Eric Sandeen
2018-06-28 2:37 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-28 4:18 ` Eric Sandeen
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=CA+55aFzeA7N3evSF2jKHu8JoTQuKDLCMKx7RiPhmym97-8HY7A@mail.gmail.com \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sandeen@redhat.com \
--cc=zhibli@redhat.com \
/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).