From: James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>
To: Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@googlemail.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>, Alan Cox <alan@redhat.com>,
Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, aviro@redhat.com,
drepper@redhat.com, sds@tycho.nsa.gov
Subject: Re: [RFC] correct flags to f_mode conversion in __dentry_open
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 12:10:33 +1000 (EST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Xine.LNX.4.64.0805221210050.32056@us.intercode.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <483461DA.3060304@gmail.com>
On Wed, 21 May 2008, Michael Kerrisk wrote:
> Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 05:59:52PM -0400, Alan Cox wrote:
> >>> does 11 really mean and should it really always be mapped to (FMODE_READ
> >>> | FMODE_WRITE) or should it continue to get mapped to 'no permission?'
> >> We've always mapped 3 to "no permission" to read or write. It's a linuxism
> >
> > I've tripped over this recently aswell. It would for sure be useful
> > to add a sumbolic O_FOO constant for this magic value '3' and document
> > it in the manpage.
>
> Late follow-up to this thread
> (http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/653123):
> I propose to add the following text to the open(2) man page.
>
> Unlike the other values that can be specified in flags,
> the access mode values O_RDONLY, O_WRONLY, and O_RDWR, do
> not specify individual bits. Rather, they define the low
> order two bits of flags, and are defined respectively as
> 0, 1, and 2. In other words, the combination O_RDONLY |
> O_WRONLY is a logical error, and certainly does not have
> the same meaning as O_RDWR. Linux reserves the special,
> non-standard access mode 3 (binary 11) in flags to mean:
> check for read and write permission on the file and
> return a descriptor that can't be used for reading or
> writing. This non-standard access mode is used by some
> Linux drivers to return a descriptor that is only to be
> used for device-specific ioctl(2) operations.
>
> Seem okay?
Looks good to me. We definitely need this documented.
- James
--
James Morris
<jmorris@namei.org>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-05-22 2:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-03-12 18:25 Eric Paris
2008-03-12 18:34 ` Al Viro
2008-03-12 18:41 ` Eric Paris
2008-03-12 18:47 ` Andreas Schwab
2008-03-15 21:59 ` Alan Cox
2008-03-15 22:00 ` Alexander Viro
2008-03-17 10:45 ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-05-21 17:54 ` Michael Kerrisk
2008-05-22 2:10 ` James Morris [this message]
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=Xine.LNX.4.64.0805221210050.32056@us.intercode.com.au \
--to=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=alan@redhat.com \
--cc=aviro@redhat.com \
--cc=drepper@redhat.com \
--cc=eparis@redhat.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mtk.manpages@googlemail.com \
--cc=sds@tycho.nsa.gov \
/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
Powered by JetHome