From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751874AbWG0Rul (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Jul 2006 13:50:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751895AbWG0Rul (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Jul 2006 13:50:41 -0400 Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.170]:61732 "EHLO ug-out-1314.google.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751876AbWG0Ruj (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Jul 2006 13:50:39 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=eOWnn1f2NL+zGo6mscd1/LFVazYdQY3o07xIjeb0mAlUPOZOYyLvpxA0zQ+iSHmZS49C5n794t1Fr6WMH0MFlxC7zZGHYM1J+BQNZy69RIEMFzUyeDB0/Lidrtt6DJpf3MCn4U3x0g8klw8fKr9Tc4TVBM0aDFXpH+X8CLcxcVo= Message-ID: Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 10:50:38 -0700 From: "Ulrich Drepper" To: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: O_CAREFUL flag to disable open() side effects Cc: "Alan Cox" , "Pekka J Enberg" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, tytso@mit.edu, tigran@veritas.com In-Reply-To: <44C8F8E3.1070306@zytor.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <1154021616.13509.68.camel@localhost.localdomain> <44C8F8E3.1070306@zytor.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 7/27/06, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Dumb thought: would it make sense to add an O_CAREFUL flag to open(), to > disable side effects? Not that I don't want to be constructive, but this is something you'll likely never be able to specify with the needed level of accuray. What is careful? I can imagine all kinds ideas possible ways file systems and device drivers might want to use this. Adding a separate interface taking a file name isn't high enough a price to open such a can of worms.