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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 10:05:34 +0000 From: Will Newton <will.newton@...il.com> To: Josef Bacik <josef@...hat.com> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, xfs@....sgi.com, joel.becker@...cle.com, cmm@...ibm.com, cluster-devel@...hat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] Btrfs: fail if we try to use hole punch On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 8:32 PM, Josef Bacik <josef@...hat.com> wrote: Hi Josef, > Btrfs doesn't have the ability to punch holes yet, so make sure we return > EOPNOTSUPP if we try to use hole punching through fallocate. This support can > be added later. Thanks, > > Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@...hat.com> > --- > fs/btrfs/inode.c | 4 ++++ > 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/inode.c b/fs/btrfs/inode.c > index 78877d7..c590add 100644 > --- a/fs/btrfs/inode.c > +++ b/fs/btrfs/inode.c > @@ -6936,6 +6936,10 @@ static long btrfs_fallocate(struct inode *inode, int mode, > alloc_start = offset & ~mask; > alloc_end = (offset + len + mask) & ~mask; > > + /* We only support the FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE mode */ > + if (mode && (mode & FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE)) > + return -EOPNOTSUPP; > + This test looks rather odd. Why do we need to test that mode is non-zero AND that mode has a specific bit set? Is there a missing ! here? -- 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists