linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 04/11] vfs: add renameat2 syscall

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, 21 Nov 2013 15:10:44 +1100
From:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc:	viro@...IV.linux.org.uk, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	hch@...radead.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, dhowells@...hat.com,
	zab@...hat.com, jack@...e.cz, luto@...capital.net, mszeredi@...e.cz
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/11] vfs: add renameat2 syscall

Hi all,

On Wed, 20 Nov 2013 14:01:45 +0100 Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu> wrote:
>
> From: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@...e.cz>
> 
> Add new renameat2 syscall, which is the same as renameat with an added
> flags argument.
> 
> Pass flags to vfs_rename() and to i_op->rename() as well.
> 
> All filesystems check flags and return -EOPNOTSUPP for unsupported flags.

Can we please consider doing this slightly slower (and avoiding
conflicts/missed new uses etc) by creating a new i_op callback and only
implementing this when necessary?

From past experience, I can just about guarantee that the patch as it is
will cause conflicts (for me in linux-next if noone else) and a new use
case will turn up before (or during) the next merge window.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@...b.auug.org.au

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped