[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKywueQDtjTxDF4-pcoBaJfXGS7Q+mvf+Jk3KE=2US=gFn_vTQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 20:50:16 +0400
From: Pavel Shilovsky <piastry@...rsoft.ru>
To: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org,
wine-devel@...ehq.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/8] vfs: Add O_DENYREAD/WRITE flags support for open syscall
2013/2/7 J. Bruce Fields <bfields@...ldses.org>:
> That would be a bug, I think. E.g. "man 3posix open":
>
> No files shall be created or modified if the function returns
> -1.
>
> Looking at the code... See the references to FILE_CREATED in
> atomic_open--looks like that's trying to prevent may_open from failing
> in this case.
>
>> I think
>> there is no difference between this case and the situation with
>> deny_lock_file there.
>
> Looks to me like it would be a bug in either case.
Then we returned from lookup_open in do_last we go to 'opened' lable.
Then we have a 3(!) chances to return -1 while a file is created
(open_check_o_direct, ima_file_check, handle_truncate). In this case
these places are bugs too.
We can call vfs_unlink if we failed after a file was created, but
possible affects need to be investigated.
--
Best regards,
Pavel Shilovsky.
--
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