[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1229541741.3384.48.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2008 14:22:21 -0500
From: Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>
To: Frederik Deweerdt <frederik.deweerdt@...og.eu>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com, hch@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sys_execve and sys_uselib do not call into fsnotify
On Wed, 2008-12-17 at 20:04 +0100, Frederik Deweerdt wrote:
> Hello Eric,
>
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 01:53:20PM -0500, Eric Paris wrote:
> > sys_execve and sys_uselib do not call into fsnotify so inotify does not get
> > open events for these types of syscalls. This patch simply makes the
> > requisite fsnotify calls.
>
> Just curious, isn't the fact that the open still may fail a problem?
> For example, if the lib is not executable in sys_uselib or if the file
> was denied write access in open_exec.
I could be convinced to change it but like what I have. At this point
the file is open. If it fails after this we are going to call fput()
which calls __fput() which calls fsnotify_close(). Seemed odd to leave
a close without an open (although that's what we have today.)
This doesn't mean the syscall was successful, but the file was opened,
and it will be closed....
-Eric
--
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