On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 14:30:26 +0200, Jason Thorpe wrote: > > On Jun 18, 2019, at 2:25 PM, Jason Thorpe <thor...@me.com> wrote: > > > >> On Jun 18, 2019, at 2:01 PM, Greg Troxel <g...@lexort.com> wrote: > >> > >> I realize mkfifo is preferred in our world, and POSIX says it is > >> preferred. But I believe we have a failure to follow POSIX. > >> > >> Other opinions? > > > > Seems you are correct. > > Sorry! Hit "send" prematurely. > > mknod(2) for the FIFO case should allow users under the same > circumstances that mkfifo(2) does.
Since our mknod() is a wrapper, we can trivially dispath to mkfifo syscall for mknod calls with S_IFIFO, can't we? I don't think we should make the mknod syscall itself to support this. -uwe
