linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] st_nlink after rmdir() and rename()

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 3 Mar 2011 13:52:18 -0800
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>
Cc:	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] st_nlink after rmdir() and rename()

On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 1:37 PM, OGAWA Hirofumi
<hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp> wrote:
>
> And I can't only see is why you refuse to make consistent behavior (if
> you are saying it). It's why I said if it's _really easy_.

The thing is, it really isn't really easy. As mentioned, it's actually
impossible on NFS, and it's possibly impossible on other filesystems
too.

So what I'm objecting to is "try to make something consistent that
CANNOT be consistent anyway", and calling it a bug.

I'm not saying there aren't real bugs there too (the actual races in
i_nlink handling are real bugs). But I _am_ saying that it's simply
not true that i_nlink must be zero if you do an "fstat()" after doing
an rmdir on an fd that you held open. Nobody can reasonably care, and
anybody who _does_ care is better off getting a nasty surprise early
rather than late.

                           Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/