[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100817214404.GH5556@shell>
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 17:44:04 -0400
From: Valerie Aurora <vaurora@...hat.com>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc: viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, jblunck@...e.de, hch@...radead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 19/39] union-mount: Implement union lookup
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 03:49:04PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Aug 2010, Valerie Aurora wrote:
> > Implement unioned directories, whiteouts, and fallthrus in pathname
> > lookup routines. do_lookup() and lookup_hash() call lookup_union()
> > after looking up the dentry from the top-level file system.
> > lookup_union() is centered around __lookup_hash(), which does cached
> > and/or real lookups and revalidates each dentry in the union stack.
> >
> > XXX - implement negative union cache entries
> >
> > XXX - handle different permissions on directories
>
> If process doing the lookup doesn't have write permission on the top
> level directory then the lookup will fail. This is not intended, is
> it?
Does it fail? I'm not checking permissions before calling
->fallthru(). But I can't test this because the code doesn't set the
owner of the copied up directory correctly. :)
Don't bother doing any permission testing on this version - it's known
buggy and I will fix it in the next release.
Thanks,
-VAL
--
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