linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH 6/6] ext4: tighten restrictions on inode flags

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]

Message-ID: <e9e943910806110449sbf30bf6xd98840fcd343519d@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 11 Jun 2008 12:49:56 +0100
From:	"Duane Griffin" <duaneg@...da.com>
To:	"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, "Andreas Dilger" <adilger@....com>,
	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] ext4: tighten restrictions on inode flags

2008/6/11 Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>:
>> +/* Mask out flags that are inappropriate for the given type of inode. */
>> +static inline __le32 ext4_mask_flags(__le16 mode, __le32 flags)
>> +{
>> +     if (S_ISDIR(mode))
>> +             return flags;
>> +     else if (S_ISREG(mode))
>> +             return flags & ~EXT4_REG_FLMASK;
>> +     else
>> +             return flags & ~EXT4_OTHER_FLMASK;
>> +}
>> +
>
> why are the arguments __le32 ? They should be in host order.
>
> static inline  __u32 ext4_mask_flags(umode_t mode, __u32 flags)

Whoops, I was matching the fields in ex4_inode, but I should have been
looking at ext4_inode_info. Shouldn't sparse have complained about
that?

Thanks,
Duane.

-- 
"I never could learn to drink that blood and call it wine" - Bob Dylan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html