Re: [patch] timerfd add flags check

[Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>]

On Wed, 11 Feb 2009, Michael Kerrisk wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 1:36 PM, Michael Kerrisk
> <mtk.manpages@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 12:31 PM, Davide Libenzi
> > <davidel@xmailserver.org> wrote:
> >> Like Michael requested, this patch adds a missing check for valid flags in
> >> timerfd_settime(), and make it return EINVAL in case some extra bits are
> >> set.
> >>
> >> Michael said:
> >> If this is to be any use to userland apps that want to check flag
> >> support (perhaps it is too late already), then the sooner we get it
> >> into the kernel the better: 2.6.29 would be good; earlier stables as
> >> well would be even better.
> >>
> >> Acked-by: Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>
> >>
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>
> >
> > Davide, one question: is the TFD_FLAGS_SET constant below needed?
> 
> Davide, Ping!  I see Andrew already took the patch, which seems to
> define this unnecessary macro.

Yes, Michael! I will post a correction to Andrew. OTOH an un-necessary 
macro defined could even be passed into the lower priority queue, don't 
you think?



- Davide