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:	Thu, 19 Jun 2014 14:19:50 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <>
To:	Philippe De Muyter <>
Cc:, Al Viro <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] init/do_mounts.c: treat EROFS like EACCES

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 18:12:44 +0200 Philippe De Muyter <> wrote:

> some combinations of filesystem and block device (at least vfat on mmc)
> yield -EROFS instead of -EACCES when the device is read-only.  Retry
> mounting with MS_RDONLY set, just like for the EACCES case, instead of
> failing directly.
> ...
> --- a/init/do_mounts.c
> +++ b/init/do_mounts.c
> @@ -394,6 +394,7 @@ retry:
>  			case 0:
>  				goto out;
>  			case -EACCES:
> +			case -EROFS:
>  				flags |= MS_RDONLY;
>  				goto retry;
>  			case -EINVAL:

hm, what's going on here.  I'd have thought it to be very logical that
file_system_type.mount() would return EROFS if the device is read-only!
But I'm suspecting that there is some convention that the fs is
supposed to return EACCES in this case.  So *perhaps* it is vfat-on-mmc
which needs fixing.  Dunno.

Al, are you able to shed light?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists