linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] vfs: new open(2) flag to open filesystem node

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]

Date:	Sun, 5 Jul 2009 22:50:08 -0700
From:	Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...il.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>, dhowells@...hat.com,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	hch@...radead.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, adilger@....com,
	alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	mtk.manpages@...il.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] vfs: new open(2) flag to open filesystem node

On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 17:40, Linus
Torvalds<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> O_SEARCH is only meaningful for directories. For anything else, it's not
> at all POSIX - it's expressly defined to be "undefined".

And this is why there is the differentiation with O_EXEC.  Yes, i
didn't mention it in the last email.  But I mentioned it when it came
up the first time.

I don't say this is indeed what is wanted/needed here.  But there are
IMO some similarities and I think implementing O_SEARCH and O_EXEC is
desirable.  If it means completely different implementations from te
proposed O_NODE, so be it.  But my gut tells me there is some overlay.
--
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/