On 1/8/20 2:17 PM, Stefan Metzmacher wrote: > Am 07.01.20 um 18:00 schrieb Jens Axboe: >> Sending this out separately, as I rebased it on top of the work.openat2 >> branch from Al to resolve some of the conflicts with the differences in >> how open flags are built. > > Now that you rebased on top of openat2, wouldn't it be better to add > openat2 that to io_uring instead of the old openat call? The IORING_OP_OPENAT already exists, so it would probably make more sense to add IORING_OP_OPENAT2 alongside that. Or I could just change it. Don't really feel that strongly about it, I'll probably just add openat2 and leave openat alone, openat will just be a wrapper around openat2 anyway. -- Jens Axboe
