linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/6] Btrfs: fail if we try to use hole punch

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:	Tue, 9 Nov 2010 07:53:50 -0500
From:	Josef Bacik <josef@...hat.com>
To:	Will Newton <will.newton@...il.com>
Cc:	Josef Bacik <josef@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, xfs@....sgi.com,
	joel.becker@...cle.com, cmm@...ibm.com, cluster-devel@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] Btrfs: fail if we try to use hole punch

On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 10:05:34AM +0000, Will Newton wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 8:32 PM, Josef Bacik <josef@...hat.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Josef,
> 
> > Btrfs doesn't have the ability to punch holes yet, so make sure we return
> > EOPNOTSUPP if we try to use hole punching through fallocate.  This support can
> > be added later.  Thanks,
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@...hat.com>
> > ---
> >  fs/btrfs/inode.c |    4 ++++
> >  1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/inode.c b/fs/btrfs/inode.c
> > index 78877d7..c590add 100644
> > --- a/fs/btrfs/inode.c
> > +++ b/fs/btrfs/inode.c
> > @@ -6936,6 +6936,10 @@ static long btrfs_fallocate(struct inode *inode, int mode,
> >        alloc_start = offset & ~mask;
> >        alloc_end =  (offset + len + mask) & ~mask;
> >
> > +       /* We only support the FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE mode */
> > +       if (mode && (mode & FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE))
> > +               return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > +
> 
> This test looks rather odd. Why do we need to test that mode is
> non-zero AND that mode has a specific bit set? Is there a missing !
> here?

Yeah I'm missing a !, I copy and pasted the wrong bit when I went around adding
this check to everybody, I'll be fixing it up for the next go around.  Thanks,

Josef
--
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/