LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* RFC: More functions allowed with O_PATH
@ 2015-01-27 12:58 Pádraig Brady
  2015-01-27 17:30 ` Christoph Hellwig
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Pádraig Brady @ 2015-01-27 12:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: lkml, aneesh.kumar, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)

Since fsync(), fdatasync(), syncfs() work on an identifying descriptor,
and all work against a read-only file for example,
should any/all these functions work with a descriptor opened with O_PATH ?

thanks,
Pádraig.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

* Re: RFC: More functions allowed with O_PATH
  2015-01-27 12:58 RFC: More functions allowed with O_PATH Pádraig Brady
@ 2015-01-27 17:30 ` Christoph Hellwig
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2015-01-27 17:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: P??draig Brady; +Cc: lkml, aneesh.kumar, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)

On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 12:58:55PM +0000, P??draig Brady wrote:
> Since fsync(), fdatasync(), syncfs() work on an identifying descriptor,
> and all work against a read-only file for example,
> should any/all these functions work with a descriptor opened with O_PATH ?

fsync and fdatasync work on the file data, so they defintively
shouldn't.

syncfs might make sense as we just use it as a handle for the containing
filesystem.

Adding fchmod and fchown would be more useful as they are allowed by
Posix on O_EXEC and O_SEARCH fds.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2015-01-27 17:30 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2015-01-27 12:58 RFC: More functions allowed with O_PATH Pádraig Brady
2015-01-27 17:30 ` Christoph Hellwig

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).