This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH 0/2] openat2: minor uapi cleanups
- From: Christian Brauner <christian dot brauner at ubuntu dot com>
- To: Aleksa Sarai <cyphar at cyphar dot com>
- Cc: Alexander Viro <viro at zeniv dot linux dot org dot uk>, Jeff Layton <jlayton at kernel dot org>, "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields at fieldses dot org>, Shuah Khan <shuah at kernel dot org>, Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>, David Laight <david dot laight at aculab dot com>, dev at opencontainers dot org, containers at lists dot linux-foundation dot org, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org, linux-api at vger dot kernel dot org, linux-fsdevel at vger dot kernel dot org, linux-kernel at vger dot kernel dot org, linux-kselftest at vger dot kernel dot org
- Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2019 12:19:50 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] openat2: minor uapi cleanups
- References: <20191219105533.12508-1-cyphar@cyphar.com>
On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 09:55:28PM +1100, Aleksa Sarai wrote:
> While openat2(2) is still not yet in Linus's tree, we can take this
> opportunity to iron out some small warts that weren't noticed earlier:
>
> * A fix was suggested by Florian Weimer, to separate the openat2
> definitions so glibc can use the header directly. I've put the
> maintainership under VFS but let me know if you'd prefer it belong
> ot the fcntl folks.
>
> * Having heterogenous field sizes in an extensible struct results in
> "padding hole" problems when adding new fields (in addition the
> correct error to use for non-zero padding isn't entirely clear ).
> The simplest solution is to just copy clone(3)'s model -- always use
> u64s. It will waste a little more space in the struct, but it
> removes a possible future headache.
Am I imagining things or did I get the same patch series twice?
Christian