Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756659AbaKSUaH (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Nov 2014 15:30:07 -0500 Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([149.20.54.216]:38443 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756295AbaKSUaF (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Nov 2014 15:30:05 -0500 Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2014 15:30:01 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <20141119.153001.1273476178846053821.davem@davemloft.net> To: drysdale@google.com Cc: viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, eparis@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, inux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: sparc: Clashing values for O_PATH and FMODE_NONOTIFY? From: David Miller In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Mew version 6.5 on Emacs 24.1 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.7 (shards.monkeyblade.net [149.20.54.216]); Wed, 19 Nov 2014 12:30:04 -0800 (PST) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: David Drysdale Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 13:13:51 +0000 > 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 think you will need to change the internal value, to not clash with the sparc exported one, for sure. -- 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/