[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <B0449E28-B18A-4009-B6CA-8AEED22F4CD7@dilger.ca>
Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2011 22:20:08 -0700
From: Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca>
To: Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
Cc: Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@...e.de>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>,
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"sfrench@...ibm.com" <sfrench@...ibm.com>,
"ffilz@...ibm.com" <ffilz@...ibm.com>,
"adilger@....com" <adilger@....com>,
"sandeen@...hat.com" <sandeen@...hat.com>,
"bfields@...i.umich.edu" <bfields@...i.umich.edu>,
"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
"nfsv4@...ux-nfs.org" <nfsv4@...ux-nfs.org>,
"linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -V4 08/11] vfs: Add new file and directory create permission flags
Actually, I think it is required by POSIX that EXDEV is returned when cross-linking files. For mv calling rename() at least it uses a return EXDEV to copy the file to the target filesystem instead of just giving up and returning an error. It may be other applications like tar have a similar dependency for link().
Cheers, Andreas
On 2011-01-02, at 16:21, Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu> wrote:
> I was going through some old patches in the ext4 patchwork list, and
> came across this. It looks like this patch has never been applied to
> mainline. If it's a "clear improvement", any reason not to submit it?
>
> Regards,
>
> - Ted
>
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 03:14:00PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
>>
>> Ah, you mean this:
>>
>> --- a/fs/namei.c
>> +++ b/fs/namei.c
>> @@ -2450,7 +2450,9 @@ int vfs_link(struct dentry *old_dentry, struct inode *dir, struct dentry *new_de
>> if (!inode)
>> return -ENOENT;
>>
>> - error = may_create(dir, new_dentry, S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode));
>> + if (S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode))
>> + return -EPERM;
>> + error = may_create(dir, new_dentry, 0);
>> if (error)
>> return error;
>>
>> @@ -2464,8 +2466,6 @@ int vfs_link(struct dentry *old_dentry, struct inode *dir, struct dentry *new_de
>> return -EPERM;
>> if (!dir->i_op->link)
>> return -EPERM;
>> - if (S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode))
>> - return -EPERM;
>>
>> error = security_inode_link(old_dentry, dir, new_dentry);
>> if (error)
>>
>> This is a clear improvement; I don't think it matters that user-space will
>> get -EPERM instead of -EXDEV when trying to hard-link a directory across
>> devices.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Andreas
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
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