[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHse=S_EY3mJ_pdZf+A46joro_uNy=6tXGG1v7Va4NX_YxJu2w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 13:13:51 +0000
From: David Drysdale <drysdale@...gle.com>
To: Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, inux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: sparc: Clashing values for O_PATH and FMODE_NONOTIFY?
Hi folks,
It looks like the value for O_PATH on sparc:
arch/sparc/include/uapi/asm/fcntl.h:37:#define O_PATH 0x1000000
clashes with the arch-independent value for __FMODE_NONOTIFY:
include/linux/fs.h:137:#define FMODE_NONOTIFY ((__force fmode_t)0x1000000)
include/linux/fs.h:2764:#define __FMODE_NONOTIFY ((__force int)
FMODE_NONOTIFY)
and they are both in the same numbering space, as indicated by the
comment at the top of include/uapi/asm-generic/fcntl.h and the use in
fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify_user.c:715.
Presumably this could theoretically cause problems (no notifications for
O_PATH files on SPARC?), so would it be a good idea to renumber
FMODE_NONOTIFY? (I *think* that value is entirely kernel-internal.)
Given that this has happened before (12ed2e36c98aec6c4155 "fanotify:
FMODE_NONOTIFY and __O_SYNC in sparc conflict") it would probably
also be a good idea to add __FMODE_NOTIFY to the uniqueness check in
fs/fcntl.c:fcntl_init().
Thoughts?
(I can generate a speculative patch if this is wrong and needs fixing, but I
won't be able to do much about testing it.)
David
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists