On May 17, 2019 9:13:26 AM GMT+02:00, David Howells <dhowells@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >Christian Brauner <christian@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> If you still prefer to have cloexec flags >> for the 4 new syscalls then yes, >> if they could at least all have the same name >> (FSMOUNT_CLOEXEC?) that would be good. > >They don't all have the same value (see OPEN_TREE_CLOEXEC). > >Note that I also don't want to blindly #define them to O_CLOEXEC >because it's >not necessarily the same value on all arches. Currently it can be >02000000, >010000000 or 0x400000 for instance, which means that if it's sharing a >mask >with other flags, at least three bits have to be reserved for it or we >have to >have arch-dependent bit juggling. Ugh. Right, I forgot about that entirely. Christian > >One thing I like about your approach of just making them O_CLOEXEC by >default >and removing the constants is that it avoids this mess entirely. > >David
