-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 170
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
cleanup(driver): unlinkat & linkat flags #1538
cleanup(driver): unlinkat & linkat flags #1538
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Everett Badeaux <[email protected]>
Please double check driver/API_VERSION file. See versioning. /hold |
/hold @ecbadeaux thanks! Let's defer this one after we have release 0.14.0 as I see some e2e test failures, we need to investigate more carefully. |
@incertum can you rerun the pipeline and see if it maybe was a fluke? I know this has happened once before |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
/approve
/next-driver
/unhold
LGTM label has been added. Git tree hash: 582aa07718322c4acd6823c4f3dd2d4f42b1485d
|
@Andreagit97 Can you check this out? |
/milestone next-driver |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
/approve
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: Andreagit97, ecbadeaux, incertum The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
What type of PR is this?
/kind bug
/kind cleanup
Any specific area of the project related to this PR?
/area driver-bpf
/area driver-modern-bpf
Does this PR require a change in the driver versions?
I am not sure about this.
What this PR does / why we need it:
I am trying to address the issue where linkat and unlinkat is handling the flag params as an unsigned integer when it should be handling it as in int.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
part of #515
(partial fix other issues still remain in 515)
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?: