Re: new flag: AT_NO_JUMPS

From: Andy Lutomirski
Date: Mon May 01 2017 - 00:53:13 EST

On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 9:10 AM, Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 09:38:22PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>> It sounds more like AT_NO_ESCAPE ... or AT_BELOW, or something.
> I considered AT_ROACH_MOTEL at one point... Another interesting
> question is whether EXDEV would've been better than ELOOP.
> Opinions?

In support of my homeland, I propose AT_HOTEL_CALIFORNIA.

How about EXDEV for crossing a mountpoint and ELOOP for absolute
symlinks or invalid ..? (Is there a technical reason why the same AT_
flag should trigger both cases?)