[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130712200205.GD4165@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 21:02:05 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [git pull] vfs.git part 2
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:42:15PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> As to the mode argument: we should encourage people to have it, since
> the inode *may* become visible afterwards. See above (can you do
> linkat() to just turn an fd into a name? I didn't really check, but I
> think you can do it as a "link(/proc/sef/fd/..)" thing regardless).
link() won't do it, linkat() with the right arguments will (link(2)
doesn't follow symlinks on the oldname). It's a bit more complicated,
though:
* vfs_link() will refuse to link with link count that went down to 0
(always had, and that's a damn good idea for security reasons)
* with O_TMPFILE, vfs_link() will act as usual *if* you give open()
O_EXCL as well - files created that way cannot be linked in, ever. They
stay with link count 0 and they die as soon as they are closed. Again,
that's the behaviour we'd have with O_CREAT open + unlink. tmpfile(3) ought
to call it that way.
* O_TMPFILE _without_ O_EXCL == you may link it in once you've
decided that you've set it up enough. In that case you are supposed to
open it, write whatever you want to write, fchmod/fchown/fsetxattr/etc.
and use linkat() to put it in place. Or use vfs_link() if you are doing
that kernel-side.
--
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