Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161615AbaJaBEw (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Oct 2014 21:04:52 -0400 Received: from mail-yh0-f42.google.com ([209.85.213.42]:36545 "EHLO mail-yh0-f42.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161426AbaJaBEu (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Oct 2014 21:04:50 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <4e8f7a1abcf5e0527ef8968143b2d0fcae48f5f4.1414658968.git.e@nanocritical.com> <5452B241.5010603@amacapital.net> Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 18:04:49 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: x1ZbZ-8URaVet1DUfzp9B3uDRAA Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] fs: allow open(dir, O_TMPFILE|..., 0) with mode 0 From: Linus Torvalds To: Eric Rannaud Cc: Andy Lutomirski , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Alexander Viro , linux-fsdevel , Andrew Morton Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 5:57 PM, Eric Rannaud wrote: > > Yes, there definitely is a glibc bug: a fix is being worked on and it > looks like it will go in. The change replaces the test for O_CREAT by > a test for either O_CREAT or O_TMPFILE. Why not just do it unconditionally? There really is no downside. Doing it conditionally only makes the generated code slower and mode complex. For absolutely zero gain, as far as I can tell. Does any architecture actually do anything wrong? It's actually closer in spirit to the original "open()" model than the existing code. Linus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/