On Fri, Jun 9, 2023 at 4:00 PM Christian Brauner <brauner@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 09, 2023 at 02:54:32PM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote: [...] > > Uh, I misread as that's only used in cachefiles and in overlayfs so it's > probably fine. I thought this was the generic version. Though it might > still be preferable to keep FMODE_NOACCOUNT and FMODE_FAKE_PATH distinct > since there's really no reason why tmpfiles should partake in the fake > path stuff... The reason is (wait for it) no more available bits in f_flags. Yeh, there is one place left in 0x4000000, but I didn't want to waste it given that FMODE_NOACCOUNT and FMODE_FAKE_PATH use cases are pretty close. BTW, you reminded me that I forgot to CC dhowells (add now). Thanks, Amir.
