From: Yury Norov <ynorov@caviumnetworks.com>
To: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-api@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add renameat2 function [BZ #17662]
Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 08:46:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180702084622.GA15274@yury-thinkpad> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <60505ccf-a399-6320-74f5-e2e17965d25c@redhat.com>
+ Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, kernel maillists.
On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 08:48:36AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 07/01/2018 11:49 PM, Yury Norov wrote:
>
> > > +#ifdef __USE_GNU
> > > +/* Flags for renameat. */
> >
> > Flags for renameat2, right?
>
> Thanks, fixed.
>
> > > +# define RENAME_NOREPLACE (1 << 0)
> > > +# define RENAME_EXCHANGE (1 << 1)
> > > +# define RENAME_WHITEOUT (1 << 2)
> >
> > I really don't understand how it works. Could you / somebody explain me?
> >
> > include/uapi/linux/fs.h in kernel sources already defines this flags,
> > and this file is usually available in Linux distribution. So I don't
> > understand what for it is duplicated here. If you keep in mind
> > old linux headers or non-linux systems, I think it should be protected
> > with #ifndef guards.
>
> <linux/fs.h> undefines and defines macros not mentioned in the standards
> (and it even contains a few unrelated structs), so we cannot include it
> without _GNU_SOURCE.
>
> It might be possible to include it only for _GNU_SOURCE, but there are a
> lot of things in <linux/fs.h>, so that does not seem to be particularly
> advisable.
>
> We still support building glibc with 3.2 kernel headers, and if the
> definitions you quoted above are not available, building the test case
> would fail.
Is my understanding correct that glibc community finds <linux/fs.h>
inappropriate for their use, and prefer to re-introduce (duplicate)
its functionality locally? I think it's wrong. The right way to go
is to make kernel headers comfortable for users instead of ignoring
it.
Are you OK to switch to kernel RENAME_* definitions if they will be
located in separated small file? Like in the patch below.
Signed-off-by: Yury Norov <ynorov@caviumnetworks.com>
---
include/uapi/linux/fs.h | 4 +---
include/uapi/linux/rename.h | 12 ++++++++++++
2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 include/uapi/linux/rename.h
diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/fs.h b/include/uapi/linux/fs.h
index c27576d471c2..46c03ea31a76 100644
--- a/include/uapi/linux/fs.h
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/fs.h
@@ -44,9 +44,7 @@
#define SEEK_HOLE 4 /* seek to the next hole */
#define SEEK_MAX SEEK_HOLE
-#define RENAME_NOREPLACE (1 << 0) /* Don't overwrite target */
-#define RENAME_EXCHANGE (1 << 1) /* Exchange source and dest */
-#define RENAME_WHITEOUT (1 << 2) /* Whiteout source */
+#include <linux/rename.h>
struct file_clone_range {
__s64 src_fd;
diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/rename.h b/include/uapi/linux/rename.h
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..7178f0565657
--- /dev/null
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/rename.h
@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
+/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note */
+#ifndef _UAPI_LINUX_RENAME_H
+#define _UAPI_LINUX_RENAME_H
+
+/*
+ * Definitions for rename syscall family.
+ */
+#define RENAME_NOREPLACE (1 << 0) /* Don't overwrite target */
+#define RENAME_EXCHANGE (1 << 1) /* Exchange source and dest */
+#define RENAME_WHITEOUT (1 << 2) /* Whiteout source */
+
+#endif /* _UAPI_LINUX_RENAME_H */
--
2.17.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-07-02 8:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-06-30 12:15 Florian Weimer
2018-06-30 20:22 ` Joseph Myers
2018-06-30 21:11 ` Florian Weimer
2018-06-30 22:26 ` Joseph Myers
2018-07-01 21:49 ` Yury Norov
2018-07-02 6:48 ` Florian Weimer
2018-07-02 8:46 ` Yury Norov [this message]
2018-07-02 9:32 ` Florian Weimer
2018-07-02 8:59 ` Andreas Schwab
2018-07-02 15:11 ` Joseph Myers
2018-07-02 17:38 ` Paul Eggert
2018-07-02 19:46 ` Joseph Myers
2018-07-02 19:58 ` Paul Eggert
2018-07-03 6:40 ` Florian Weimer
2018-07-03 19:06 ` Paul Eggert
2018-07-04 9:04 ` Andreas Schwab
2018-07-04 10:39 ` Florian Weimer
2018-07-04 16:31 ` Carlos O'Donell
2018-07-04 19:36 ` Paul Eggert
2018-07-04 20:13 ` Carlos O'Donell
2018-07-04 20:26 ` Florian Weimer
2018-07-04 20:46 ` Paul Eggert
2018-07-05 13:19 ` Carlos O'Donell
2018-07-04 20:47 ` Paul Eggert
2018-07-04 19:21 ` Carlos O'Donell
2018-07-04 19:53 ` Paul Eggert
2018-07-04 20:28 ` Florian Weimer
2018-07-04 20:36 ` Paul Eggert
2018-07-05 14:01 ` Florian Weimer
2018-07-05 14:25 ` Paul Eggert
2018-07-05 15:26 ` Florian Weimer
2018-07-05 16:53 ` Paul Eggert
2018-07-05 16:57 ` Carlos O'Donell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180702084622.GA15274@yury-thinkpad \
--to=ynorov@caviumnetworks.com \
--cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).