Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1378333

Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] vfs: Define new syscall umask2 [formerly getumask]

Show all headers | View raw

Hi Richard,

On Wed, 13 Apr 2016 20:05:33 +0100 "Richard W.M. Jones" <rjones@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> It's not possible to read the process umask without also modifying it,
> which is what umask(2) does.  A library cannot read umask safely,
> especially if the main program might be multithreaded.

I was wondering if you really need to read the umask, or would just a
"ignore umask" flag to open{,at} do what you want?

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

[PATCH v4 0/3] vfs: Define new syscall umask2 [formerly getumask] "Richard W.M. Jones" <rjones@redhat.com> - 2016-04-13 21:10 +0200
  [PATCH v4 2/3] x86: Wire up new umask2 system call on x86. "Richard W.M. Jones" <rjones@redhat.com> - 2016-04-13 21:10 +0200
  umask2 man page (was: Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] vfs: Define new syscall  umask2 [formerly getumask]) "Richard W.M. Jones" <rjones@redhat.com> - 2016-04-13 21:40 +0200
  Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] vfs: Define new syscall umask2 [formerly getumask] "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> - 2016-04-13 21:50 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] vfs: Define new syscall umask2 [formerly getumask] Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> - 2016-04-13 22:50 +0200
      Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] vfs: Define new syscall umask2 [formerly getumask] "Richard W.M. Jones" <rjones@redhat.com> - 2016-04-13 23:00 +0200
  Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] vfs: Define new syscall umask2 [formerly  getumask] Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> - 2016-04-14 01:10 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] vfs: Define new syscall umask2 [formerly getumask] "Richard W.M. Jones" <rjones@redhat.com> - 2016-04-14 11:20 +0200

csiph-web