On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 09:42:54AM -0400, Rich Felker wrote: > > As told you earlier on linux-kernel just send a patch with your semantics > > Apologies, I did not see the reply, and I'm still looking for it. I > should have put the request to CC me more prominently in the email... Sorry, it actually was libc-alpha that I replied to. I didn't notice you sent two slightly different messages instead of a having a cross-posted discussion, which would have been more useful. > > > to lkml. We're not going to reserve a value for a namespace that is > > reserved for the kernel to implement something that should better > > be done in kernel space. > > Did you mean "that should better be done in user space"? No. It should be done in kernelspace, just like all other O_ flags. > > Whether O_SEARCH and O_EXEC are provided fully natively by the kernel > or handled by userspace, either way a reserved value in the open flags > must be set aside. Otherwise any value used by the userspace > implementation would risk conflicting with future kernel features > using the same bit(s). No flag is going to get reserved without a proper (kernel-level) implementation. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
