Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] Check O_* flags set with fcntl() on anon_inodefiles.

[Al Viro]

On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 09:26:35AM -0800, Matt Helsley wrote:
> > > [PATCH 1/4] signalfd
> > > [PATCH 2/4] timerfd
> > > [PATCH 3/4] epoll
> > > [PATCH 4/4] eventfd
> > > 
> > > I did not check the perf, kvm-vm, or kvm-vcpu uses of anon_inodes.
> > 
> > Er...  O_ASYNC is silently ignored for regular files as well, so any
> > userland code that tries to rely on fcntl() rejecting it is and always
> > had been badly b0rken.
> 
> Of course. Did you mean to imply that the kernel shouldn't bother to
> reject these, or were you merely making an observation?

I'm wondering why should we start changing that behaviour and what makes
these 4 cases special?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/