Messages in this thread | | | From | Damien Le Moal <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] fs: New zonefs file system | Date | Wed, 25 Dec 2019 07:20:02 +0000 |
| |
On 2019/12/25 15:05, Damien Le Moal wrote: >>> + inode->i_mode = S_IFREG; >> >> i_mode &= ~S_IRWXUGO; ? > > Yes, indeed that is better. checkpatch.pl does spit out a warning if one > uses the S_Ixxx macros though. See below.
Please disregard this comment. checkpatch is fine. For some reasons I had warnings in the past but they are now gone. So using the macros instead of the harder to read hard-coded values.
> >> >> Note that clearing the mode flags won't prevent programs with an >> existing writable fd from being able to call write(). I'd imagine that >> they'd hit EIO pretty fast though, so that might not matter. >> >>> + zone->wp = zone->start; >>> + } else if (zone->cond == BLK_ZONE_COND_READONLY) { >>> + inode->i_flags |= S_IMMUTABLE; >>> + inode->i_mode &= ~(0222); /* S_IWUGO */ >> >> Might as well just use S_IWUGO directly here?
Yes, I did in v4.
> Because checkpatch spits out a warning if I do. I would prefer using the > macro as I find it much easier to read. Should I just ignore checkpatch > warning ?
My mistake. No warnings :)
-- Damien Le Moal Western Digital Research
| |