[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170430161040.GW29622@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2017 17:10:40 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: new ...at() flag: AT_NO_JUMPS
On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 09:38:22PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> It sounds more like AT_NO_ESCAPE ... or AT_BELOW, or something.
I considered AT_ROACH_MOTEL at one point... Another interesting
question is whether EXDEV would've been better than ELOOP.
Opinions?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists