On Thu, Apr 16, 2026 at 05:03:26PM +0200, Jori Koolstra wrote: > > > Op 16-04-2026 16:21 CEST schreef Dorjoy Chowdhury <[email protected]>: > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2026 at 7:52 PM Jori Koolstra <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 28, 2026 at 11:22:22PM +0600, Dorjoy Chowdhury wrote: > > > > diff --git a/arch/alpha/include/uapi/asm/fcntl.h > > > > b/arch/alpha/include/uapi/asm/fcntl.h > > > > index 50bdc8e8a271..fe488bf7c18e 100644 > > > > --- a/arch/alpha/include/uapi/asm/fcntl.h > > > > +++ b/arch/alpha/include/uapi/asm/fcntl.h > > > > @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ > > > > > > > > #define O_PATH 040000000 > > > > #define __O_TMPFILE 0100000000 > > > > +#define OPENAT2_REGULAR 0200000000 > > > > > > > > > > I don't quite understand why we are adding OPENAT2_REGULAR inside the > > > O_* flag range. Wasn't this supposed to be only supported for openat2()? > > > If so, I don't see the need to waste an O_* flag bit. But maybe I am > > > missing something. > > > > > > > Yes, OPENAT2_REGULAR is only supported for openat2. I am not sure if I > > got a specific review to not add OPENAT2_REGULAR in the O_* flag 32 > > bit range. But as far as I understand, for the old open system calls > > we can't easily add new O_* flags as the older codepaths don't strip > > off unknown bits which openat2 does. It's not easy to add new O_* > > flags for the old open system calls since that could break userspace > > programs. > > If I recall correctly, Aleksa has suggested we might also want to add > O_EMPTYPATH to openat() instead of only allowing this for openat2(). > I am waiting to see what Christian thinks of this.
We can do that, yes. For O_EMPTYPATH that is workable. I don't mind too much if we leave OPENAT2_REGUALR in the 32-bit flag space. It'll silently be ignored but the flag name should give it away.
