[lkml]   [2020]   [Mar]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Have RESOLVE_* flags superseded AT_* flags for new syscalls?
On 2020-03-02, David Howells <> wrote:
> Florian Weimer <> wrote:
> > Regarding open flags, I think the key point for future APIs is to avoid
> > using the set of flags for both control of the operation itself
> > (O_NOFOLLOW/AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW, O_NOCTTY) and properaties of the
> > resulting descriptor (O_RDWR, O_SYNC). I expect that doing that would
> > help code that has to re-create an equivalent descriptor. The operation
> > flags are largely irrelevant to that if you can get the descriptor by
> > other means.
> It would also be nice to sort out the problem with O_CLOEXEC. That can have a
> different value, depending on the arch - so it excludes at least three bits
> from the O_* flag set.

Not to mention there are (at least?) three or four different values for
_CLOEXEC for different syscalls...

Aleksa Sarai
Senior Software Engineer (Containers)
SUSE Linux GmbH
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-03-02 16:06    [W:0.159 / U:1.372 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site