Re: RFC: Serial port DTR/RTS - O_<something>
From: H. Peter Anvin
Date: Fri Nov 14 2025 - 13:54:00 EST
On November 14, 2025 10:49:09 AM PST, "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>On Thu, 13 Nov 2025, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>
>> > I think this is going to be the most difficult. I don't remember why I
>> > rejected the old submission, but maybe it would have modified the
>> > existing behaviour? A new open flag "O_DO_NOT_TOUCH_ANYTHING" might be
>> > the simplest?
>> >
>>
>> Okay, to I'm going to toss out a couple suggestions for naming:
>>
>> O_(PRE|FOR|N|NO)?(INIT|CONFIG|START)(DEV|HW|IO)?
>> O_(NO?RESET|PREPARE)(DEV|HW|IO)?
>> O_NO?TOUCH
>> O_NYET ("not yet")
>>
>> I think my personal preference at the moment is either O_NYET or O_PRECONFIG
>> or O_NYET; although it is perhaps a bit more "use case centric" than "what
>> actual effect it has" I think it might be clearer. A -DEV, -HW or -IO suffix
>> would seem to needlessly preclude it being used for future similar use cases
>> for files that are not device nodes.
>
> Hmm, I'm inconvinced about any of these.
>
> How about O_FDONLY, to reflect that you are after a file descriptor only
>with no further actions at open time while avoiding the ambiguity of names
>such as CONFIG vs NOCONFIG or speaking more broadly implying any specific
>intent of use at all such as with CONFIG/INIT/PREPARE/RESET/whatever?
>
> I think O_FDONLY is concise, easy to spell/say/remember, and fits the
>purpose. Your call!
>
> Maciej
Overlaps too much with O_PATH, and implies that communication isn't possible *after* device-dependent setup.