linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 05/32] Unionfs: do not use fsstack_copy_attr

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: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0709030840110.4454@fbirervta.pbzchgretzou.qr>
Date:	Mon, 3 Sep 2007 08:43:13 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>
To:	Josef 'Jeff' Sipek <jsipek@...sunysb.edu>
cc:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, hch@...radead.org,
	viro@....linux.org.uk, bharata@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	j.blunck@...harburg.de, Erez Zadok <ezk@...sunysb.edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/32] Unionfs: do not use fsstack_copy_attr_all


On Sep 2 2007 22:20, Josef 'Jeff' Sipek wrote:
>+/* copy a/m/ctime from the lower branch with the newest times */
>+static inline void unionfs_copy_attr_times(struct inode *upper)
>+{
>
>+		/* XXX: should we notify_change on our upper inode? */

I do not think so. Inotifying should only happen when the user really 
did something (e.g. touch, cp, whatever). When merely the newest time is 
picked from a stack of files and applied to the user-visible dentry, 
nothing should happen.


	Jan
-- 
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/