Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1613384
| From | Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: RFC: reject unknown open flags |
| Date | 2017-03-30 21:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tqNLX-2xj-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <tqLh7-GX-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <tqLK9-16I-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <tqM3w-1dT-27@gated-at.bofh.it> <tqMZz-1Yh-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <tqNCh-2tO-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 12:02 PM, Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu> wrote:
>
>> I'm assuming you'd also possible want to be able to use F_SETFL to set
>> O_ATOMIC after the fact
>
> Just for fun, one thread can set O_ATOMIC at the same time another thread is
> doing a 'write'....
I'm sure that falls under "if you break it, you get to keep both
pieces". IOW, I don't think anybody will ever say that the concurrent
write has to have some particular semantics wrt the concurrent
O_ATOMIC. Maybe *part* of the write will be done with some semantics,
and part of the write will be done with other semantics.
My guess is that there is going to be very few O_ATOMIC users anyway,
and they'll very carefully set it once and test it (or not even test
it - just make it be a configuration flag and tell people "don't ask
for O_ATOMIC if your system doesn't support it")
Linus
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
RFC: reject unknown open flags Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> - 2017-03-30 18:40 +0200
[PATCH 1/2] fs: add a VALID_OPEN_FLAGS Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> - 2017-03-30 18:40 +0200
[PATCH 2/2] fs: reject unknown open flags Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> - 2017-03-30 18:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/2] fs: reject unknown open flags Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2017-03-30 19:10 +0200
Re: RFC: reject unknown open flags Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2017-03-30 19:10 +0200
Re: RFC: reject unknown open flags Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> - 2017-03-30 19:30 +0200
Re: RFC: reject unknown open flags Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2017-03-30 20:30 +0200
Re: RFC: reject unknown open flags Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> - 2017-03-30 20:30 +0200
Re: RFC: reject unknown open flags Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2017-03-30 20:50 +0200
Re: RFC: reject unknown open flags Boaz Harrosh <boaz@plexistor.com> - 2017-03-30 22:10 +0200
Re: RFC: reject unknown open flags Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu> - 2017-03-30 21:10 +0200
Re: RFC: reject unknown open flags Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2017-03-30 21:20 +0200
Re: RFC: reject unknown open flags Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> - 2017-03-30 21:40 +0200
csiph-web