[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190728212226.GL6088@mit.edu>
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2019 17:22:26 -0400
From: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
To: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-fscrypt@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
Paul Crowley <paulcrowley@...gle.com>,
Satya Tangirala <satyat@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 11/16] fscrypt: allow unprivileged users to add/remove
keys for v2 policies
On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 03:41:36PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> diff --git a/fs/crypto/keyring.c b/fs/crypto/keyring.c
> index 56e085c2ed8c6..307533d4d7c51 100644
> --- a/fs/crypto/keyring.c
> +++ b/fs/crypto/keyring.c
> + if (mk->mk_users->keys.nr_leaves_on_tree != 0) {
> + /*
> + * Other users have still added the key too. We removed
> + * the current user's usage of the key if there was one,
> + * but we still can't remove the key itself.
> + */
> + err = -EUSERS;
> + up_write(&key->sem);
> + goto out_put_key;
I commented about this on an earlier patch, but I'm not convinced we
should be returning EUSERS here. Returning success might be a better
choice.
- Ted
Powered by blists - more mailing lists