On 2014/02/10, 2:29 PM, "Al Viro" <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 08:16:52PM +0000, Dilger, Andreas wrote: >> >>Instead of trying to find a non-conflicting O_LOV_DELAY_CREATE flag >> >>or define a Lustre-specific flag that isn't of use to most/any other >> >>filesystems, use (O_NOCTTY|FASYNC) as the new value. These flag >> >>are not meaningful for newly-created regular files and should be >> >>OK since O_LOV_DELAY_CREATE is only meaningful for new files. > >*shrug* > >I can live with that; it's a kludge, but it's less broken than that >explicit constant - that one is a non-starter, since O_... flag >values are arch-dependent. Greg, could you please merge the original patch. We'd like to get this into our pending release of the Lustre user tools and into the releases for older kernels (which will support both the old and new flags until the support for older kernels is removed). Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger Lustre Software Architect Intel High Performance Data Division -- 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
