[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20260119092653.GA10032@lst.de>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2026 10:26:53 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>, Chao Yu <chao@...nel.org>,
Andrey Albershteyn <aalbersh@...hat.com>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
fsverity@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] fs,fsverity: handle fsverity in generic_file_open
On Mon, Jan 19, 2026 at 10:05:56AM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> > + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_FS_VERITY) && IS_VERITY(inode)) {
> > + if (filp->f_mode & FMODE_WRITE)
> > + return -EPERM;
> > + return fsverity_file_open(inode, filp);
> > + }
>
> Why do you check f_mode here when fsverity_file_open() checks for it as
> well?
Probably because it's a left over from when I tried to open code
fsverity_file_open here. I'll fix it up.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists