Re: [PATCH v6 1/4] openat2: new OPENAT2_REGULAR flag support

[Jeff Layton]

On Thu, 2026-04-16 at 23:05 +1000, Aleksa Sarai wrote:
> On 2026-04-16, Dorjoy Chowdhury <dorjoychy111@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 16, 2026 at 5:41 PM Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > 
> > > On 2026-03-28, Dorjoy Chowdhury <dorjoychy111@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > This flag indicates the path should be opened if it's a regular file.
> > > > This is useful to write secure programs that want to avoid being
> > > > tricked into opening device nodes with special semantics while thinking
> > > > they operate on regular files. This is a requested feature from the
> > > > uapi-group[1].
> > > > 
> > > > A corresponding error code EFTYPE has been introduced. For example, if
> > > > openat2 is called on path /dev/null with OPENAT2_REGULAR in the flag
> > > > param, it will return -EFTYPE. EFTYPE is already used in BSD systems
> > > > like FreeBSD, macOS.
> > > > 
> > > > When used in combination with O_CREAT, either the regular file is
> > > > created, or if the path already exists, it is opened if it's a regular
> > > > file. Otherwise, -EFTYPE is returned.
> > > > 
> > > > When OPENAT2_REGULAR is combined with O_DIRECTORY, -EINVAL is returned
> > > > as it doesn't make sense to open a path that is both a directory and a
> > > > regular file.
> > > > 
> > > > [1]: https://uapi-group.org/kernel-features/#ability-to-only-open-regular-files
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Dorjoy Chowdhury <dorjoychy111@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > 
> > > Aside from the nit below, feel free to take a
> > > 
> > > Reviewed-by: Aleksa Sarai <aleksa@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > 
> > 
> > Thanks for reviewing!
> > 
> > > > diff --git a/fs/open.c b/fs/open.c
> > > > index 681d405bc61e..a6f445f72181 100644
> > > > --- a/fs/open.c
> > > > +++ b/fs/open.c
> > > > @@ -960,7 +960,7 @@ static int do_dentry_open(struct file *f,
> > > >       if (f->f_mapping->a_ops && f->f_mapping->a_ops->direct_IO)
> > > >               f->f_mode |= FMODE_CAN_ODIRECT;
> > > > 
> > > > -     f->f_flags &= ~(O_CREAT | O_EXCL | O_NOCTTY | O_TRUNC);
> > > > +     f->f_flags &= ~(O_CREAT | O_EXCL | O_NOCTTY | O_TRUNC | OPENAT2_REGULAR);
> > > 
> > > It's not clear to me why you dropped this, I didn't see a review
> > > mentioning it either. (General note: Ideally the cover letter changelog
> > > would mention who suggested a change in brackets after the changelog
> > > line so it's easier to track where a change might've come from.)
> > > 
> > 
> > Thanks for the general note. I will keep that in mind.
> > 
> > The review was from Jeff Layton in v5
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/5fcc2a6e6d92dae0601c6b3b8faa8b2f83981afb.camel@xxxxxxxxxx/
> > " 1. OPENAT2_REGULAR leaks into f_flags - do_dentry_open() strips
> > open-time-only flags (O_CREAT|O_EXCL|O_NOCTTY|O_TRUNC)
> >   but does not strip OPENAT2_REGULAR. When a regular file is
> > successfully opened via openat2() with this flag, the bit
> >   persists in file->f_flags and will be returned by fcntl(fd, F_GETFL)."
> > 
> > I think it makes sense to strip off as OPENAT2_REGULAR is an open time
> > only flag (like O_CREAT and the others already), right?
> 
> Well, O_DIRECTORY isn't stripped so if we want to mirror that behaviour
> then it shouldn't be stripped either IMHO.
> 
> O_NOCTTY and O_TRUNC make sense to strip (they are not relevant to the
> file after it was opened -- truncation only happens at open time and you
> can always set your controlling TTY later).
> 
> The story with O_CREAT and O_EXCL is a bit more complicated. They are
> stripped but the history there is unclear -- the line was added in Linux
> 0.98.4(!) with no mention in the release note at the time. (Linus: I
> wonder if you remember why this was changed at the time? Sorry for the
> trip down memory lane...)
> 
> However, the existence of F_CREATED_QUERY kind of shows that these kinds
> of checks are stuff that userspace can find handy (though FMODE_CREATED
> is more useful than O_CREAT|O_EXCL anyway). O_EXCL is used internally
> for stuff so it can be re-exposed, I'm just not sure it's a good
> precedent to make a decision based on.
> 
> Then again, userspace can check with fstat(2) so it's not the end of the
> world, but I don't really see a strong reason to hide information from
> userspace. Since the mail was from Claude (and it tends to give silly
> nits like that) I'm not sure whether Jeff would agree with my view or
> not.

I don't have a strong feeling either way, but it "feels" like O_REGULAR
is not particularly useful to return in F_GETFL.

Once the file is open, then O_REGULAR really doesn't matter anymore. We
_know_ it's a regular file at that point or the open wouldn't have
happened. F_GETFL is more useful for showing flags that actually affect
how the file description works (e.g. O_DIRECT, O_ASYNC, etc.).

-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>