[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080424140000.GE15214@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 15:00:00 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, ezk@...sunysb.edu, mhalcrow@...ibm.com,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 00/13] vfs: add helpers to check r/o bind mounts
On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 02:48:26PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 03:05:21PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > Several calls to nfsd_setattr() for starters. But I didn't do a full
> > audit of all vfs_* callers, there might well be others.
BTW, nfsd_setattr() on r/o ->ex_mnt *will* fail. Again, check fh_verify()
and see what it does with MAY_SATTR.
And I certainly agree that it ought to be replaced by will/wont pair to
close the remount race. One that had been there all along. All fh_verify()
callers of that kind need it - we want to pull mnt_{will,wont}_write()
pair into callers *and* stretch to protect the entire relevant area.
Which contains vfs_...() in case of nfsd_create, etc. See what I mean?
That's exactly the thing I'd been talking about - the area we want to
cover is _bigger_ than vfs_...() and contains nfsd-specific logic. IOW,
doesn't get folded into any VFS-provided helper.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists