On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 15:13:20 -0600, Andreas Dilger <andreas.dilger@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 2010-04-27, at 10:13, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> > Changes from V5:
> > a) added sys_name_to_handle_at syscall which takes AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW flag
> > instead of two syscalls sys_name_to_handle and sys_lname_to_handle.
> >
> > #define AT_FDCWD -100
> > #define AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW 0x100
> >
> > static int name_to_handle(const char *name, struct file_handle *fh)
> > {
> > return syscall(338, AT_FDCWD, name, fh, 0);
> > }
> >
> > static int lname_to_handle(const char *name, struct file_handle *fh)
> > {
> > return syscall(338, AT_FDCWD, name, fh, AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW);
> > }
> >
> > static int open_by_handle(struct file_handle *fh, int flags)
> > {
> > return syscall(339, fh, flags);
> > }
> >
> > static int freadlink(int fd, char *buf, size_t bufsiz)
> > {
> > return syscall(340, fd, buf, bufsiz);
> > }
>
> Your example, while #defining the AT_* stuff, did not actually change to use the _at() interface.
>
I retained the name name_to_handle and lname_to_handle in the example
but used the same syscall number for both with right flags. So it
should be using syscall sys_name_to_handle_at
-aneesh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
