Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Organization: Red Hat UK Ltd. Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley
        Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SI4 1TE, United
        Kingdom.
        Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903
From:   David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
To:     linux-api@vger.kernel.org
cc:     dhowells@redhat.com, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, metze@samba.org,
        torvalds@linux-foundation.org, cyphar@cyphar.com,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Have RESOLVE_* flags superseded AT_* flags for new syscalls?
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <96562.1582901612.1@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date:   Fri, 28 Feb 2020 14:53:32 +0000
Message-ID: <96563.1582901612@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

	
I've been told that RESOLVE_* flags, which can be found in linux/openat2.h,
should be used instead of the equivalent AT_* flags for new system calls.  Is
this the case?

If so, should we comment them as being deprecated in the header file?  And
should they be in linux/fcntl.h rather than linux/openat2.h?

Also:

 (*) It should be noted that the RESOLVE_* flags are not a superset of the
     AT_* flags (there's no equivalent of AT_NO_AUTOMOUNT for example).

 (*) It has been suggested that AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW should be the default, but
     only RESOLVE_NO_SYMLINKS exists.

David