From: Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@suse.cz>
To: ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: [LTP] [PATCH] fcntl.2: F_OFD_XXX needs flock64
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 15:19:20 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160817131920.GE10343@rei.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1471439675.3196.8.camel@poochiereds.net>
Hi!
> > Hmm, I do not think that this is a good idea. The usuall way how to
> > handle missing constants are fallback definitions such as:
> >
> > #ifndef F_OFD_FOO
> > # define F_OFD_FOO xyz
> > #endif
> >
> > This wouldn't do much.
> >
> > Also these should be only disable on 32bit if __USE_FILE_OFFSET64 is
> > not
> > defined. But you likely meant that here.
> >
>
> That's the usual way, but in this case we wouldn't have a fallback
> constant. You'd just get an error about F_OFD_* being undefined at
> build time, which I think is what we'd want here. It's better to fail
> to compile than to build a binary that passes a bogus struct into the
> kernel.
You probably misunderstand what I was trying to say. If you look at the
sources out there (for instance at https://codesearch.debian.net/) most
of it has fallback definitions for F_OFD_* constants included in its own
header files since these flags are relatively new. Not defining these
would not accomplish anything.
One option would be to define them to something invalid such as INT_MAX
so that it's rejected by kernel on runtime. But I do not think this is
very good idea either.
--
Cyril Hrubis
chrubis@suse.cz
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-17 13:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-16 11:55 [LTP] [PATCH] fcntl.2: F_OFD_XXX needs flock64 Cyril Hrubis
2016-08-16 14:34 ` Cyril Hrubis
2016-08-16 20:04 ` Michael Kerrisk
2016-08-16 23:41 ` Jeff Layton
2016-08-17 1:08 ` Michael Kerrisk
2016-08-17 8:10 ` Cyril Hrubis
2016-08-17 11:44 ` Jeff Layton
2016-08-17 11:53 ` Cyril Hrubis
2016-08-17 13:14 ` Jeff Layton
2016-08-17 13:19 ` Cyril Hrubis [this message]
2016-08-17 13:34 ` Jeff Layton
2016-08-17 13:34 ` Cyril Hrubis
2016-08-17 19:44 ` Michael Kerrisk
2016-08-17 7:44 ` 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=20160817131920.GE10343@rei.lan \
--to=chrubis@suse.cz \
--cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
/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