linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 03/25] vfs: split __dentry

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]

Message-ID: <20120326133028.GA8436@infradead.org>
Date:	Mon, 26 Mar 2012 09:30:28 -0400
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Trond.Myklebust@...app.com, sfrench@...ba.org, sage@...dream.net,
	ericvh@...il.com, mszeredi@...e.cz
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/25] vfs: split __dentry_open()

On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 03:22:09PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > I think the O_DIRECT checks should move out of the VFS. ??The direct I/O
> > method isn't called from the VFS anywhere, but just from the
> > generic_file_* routines in filemap.c, which suggest doing the O_DIRECT
> > check in there as well.
> 
> Returning the error at the earliest opportunity (from open as opposed
> to read/write) makes sense.  Given that some apps may actually rely on
> the return value from open to verify O_DIRECT support, it doesn't seem
> to be a good idea to move the checks to read/write.

I'm fine with keeping it in open, bu it should be in generic_file_open,
not in the VFS (and yeah, generic_file_open is in open.c not filemap.c
where it should be, sorry)

--
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/