From: Russell Currey <ruscur@russell.cc>
To: Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc: Use octal numbers for file permissions
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2017 11:21:52 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1484526112.2660.1.camel@russell.cc> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170113081122.GA14043@localhost.localdomain>
On Fri, 2017-01-13 at 13:41 +0530, Balbir Singh wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 02:54:13PM +1100, Russell Currey wrote:
> > Symbolic macros are unintuitive and hard to read, whereas octal constants
> > are much easier to interpret. Replace macros for the basic permission
> > flags (user/group/other read/write/execute) with numeric constants
> > instead, across the whole powerpc tree.
> >
>
> I know Linus said otherwise, but I wonder if the churn is worth it.
> At user mode (do man 2 chmod), these constants are used frequently,
> even with chmod the command we use chmod a+r equivalents or chmod
> u+r. My big concern with numbers is how do you know you did not
> turn on the sticky bit for a file? Can you imagine if someone used
> 0x644 or 0x444 would we catch it?
I would certainly expect something like that would be caught.
>
> Not resisting, but thinking if the churn and what follows might be
> OK.
So long as the constants are still in the tree people will still send patches
with them (which continues to happen even though there's a checkpatch warning).
Constants have the issue that the same value can be written multiple ways (which
is misleading) - some of the files I touched come about the same set of
permissions different ways or even mix octal values and macros within the same
file.
I think using octal values for rwx (and sticking to macros for things like the
sticky bit) is on the side of simplicity and consistency.
>
> Balbir Singh.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-16 0:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-12 3:54 [PATCH] powerpc: Use octal numbers for file permissions Russell Currey
2017-01-13 7:51 ` Cyril Bur
2017-01-17 9:52 ` Michael Ellerman
2017-01-17 10:50 ` Oliver O'Halloran
2017-01-17 10:54 ` Oliver O'Halloran
2017-01-18 0:05 ` Cyril Bur
2017-01-13 8:11 ` Balbir Singh
2017-01-16 0:21 ` Russell Currey [this message]
2017-01-17 7:28 ` Balbir Singh
2018-01-22 3:34 ` Michael Ellerman
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=1484526112.2660.1.camel@russell.cc \
--to=ruscur@russell.cc \
--cc=bsingharora@gmail.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.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).