[lkml]   [1999]   [Sep]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Why is chmod(2)?
    Werner Almesberger wrote:
    > Jamie Lokier wrote:
    > > I recommend coding a patch to find out if O_NONE is really as easy as it
    > > seems.
    > Note that the equivalent of O_NONE has been around on Linux since '92 or
    > so (numeric value 3, I usually call it O_NOACCESS). It is required for
    > things like fdformat and setfdprm. LILO also uses it. So the "main code
    > path" already supports this. Drivers looking at f_mode or f_flags may be
    > a different story, though.

    I'm suggesting a file opened O_NONE would never call driver code.
    It's just an inode reference, for the same kind of operations you can do
    with a file name.

    So fstat() and close() are allowed, but ioctl(), fcntl(), read()
    etc. will all fail without calling any drivers or filesystem code.

    -- Jamie

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:54    [W:0.032 / U:2.388 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site