Re: Unchecked flags in statx(2) [Should be fixed before 4.11-final?]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hello Andreas,

On 04/21/2017 08:16 PM, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On Apr 21, 2017, at 7:13 AM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) <mtk.manpages@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> On 04/21/2017 03:01 PM, David Howells wrote:
>>> Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) <mtk.manpages@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> (3) There's no problem with asking for extra bits, even if the running
>>>     kerneldoes not support them, because the kernel tells you in its
>>>     response what fields it actually gave you.
>>
>> It's this piece that I overlooked. Makes sense, of course.
>> Sorry for the noise!
> 
> I agree with David that we don't want to return an error if the application
> asks for more bits than the kernel supports, otherwise the interface would
> be useless.

Yes, it's clear to me now.

> Maybe this implies that this needs to be explained more clearly in the
> statx man page?

Precisely; my thought also.

Cheers,

Michael 


-- 
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]
  Powered by Linux