Re: [PATCHv4 man-pages 3/3] open.2: describe O_BENEATH flag
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Date: 2015-08-14 14:18:10
Also in:
linux-api, linux-arch, linux-fsdevel, lkml
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Date: 2015-08-14 14:18:10
Also in:
linux-api, linux-arch, linux-fsdevel, lkml
On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 2:29 AM, David Drysdale [off-list ref] wrote:
On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 6:33 AM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On 13 August 2015 at 19:38, Andy Lutomirski [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 2:32 AM, David Drysdale [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
Signed-off-by: David Drysdale <redacted>What's the behavior wrt fcntl(F_GETFL, etc)?I would presume that O_BENEATH is one of the so-called "file creation flags". See this paragraph of the DESCRIPTION: In addition, zero or more file creation flags and file status flags can be bitwise-or'd in flags. The file creation flags are O_CLOEXEC, O_CREAT, O_DIRECTORY, O_EXCL, O_NOCTTY, O_NOFOLLOW, O_TMPFILE, O_TRUNC, and O_TTY_INIT. The file status flags are all of the remaining flags listed below. The distinction between these two groups of flags is that the file status flags can be retrieved and (in some cases) modified; see fcntl(2) for details. David, presuming this is correct (I can't see how O_BENEATH could be a "file *status* flag"), your patch should also add O_BENEATH to the list in that paragraph.Yeah, O_BENEATH makes sense as a file creation flag; I'll add it to that list -- thanks for spotting.
Should there be a test that you can't clear O_BENEATH with F_SETFL? --Andy