[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <E1Knxzm-0003y2-Jy@pomaz-ex.szeredi.hu>
Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2008 18:04:10 +0200
From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To: torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
CC: miklos@...redi.hu, jens.axboe@...cle.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: splice vs O_APPEND
On Thu, 9 Oct 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> I do wonder if we shouldn't just do this in rw_verify_area(). The whole
> reason for that function is that we used to have all those flock checks
> etc spread out all over, and some path would inevitably just miss one
> check or another. It's kind of stupid to expect low-level filesystems to
> do the IS_APPEND/IS_IMMUTABLE checks.
Do we expect them? I thought we don't care if it's marked immutable
or append-only after the file has been opened, same as with normal
permissions.
> Comments?
Your patch still ignores O_APPEND, is that what we want? It sounds
sort of strange. pwrite() for example honors O_APPEND and ignores the
position, AFAICS.
Miklos
--
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