[lkml]   [2001]   [May]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Why side-effects on open(2) are evil. (was Re: [RFD w/info-PATCH]device arguments from lookup)
Daniel Phillips wrote:
> It won't, the open for "." is handled in the VFS, not the filesystem -
> it will open the directory. (Without needing to be told it's a
> directory via O_DIRECTORY.) If you do open("magicdev") you'll get the
> device, because that's handled by magicdevfs.

You really mean that "magicdev" is a directory and:

open("magicdev/.", O_RDONLY);
open("magicdev", O_RDONLY);

would both succeed but open different objects?

> I'm not claiming there isn't breakage somewhere,

you break UNIX fundamentals. But I'm quite relieved now because I'm
pretty sure that something like that will never go into the kernel.

Ciao, ET.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:54    [W:0.268 / U:1.908 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site