[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1422950306.12575.0.camel@stgolabs.net>
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2015 23:58:26 -0800
From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
To: Alexander Holler <holler@...oftware.de>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] WIP: Add syscall unlinkat_s (currently x86* only)
On Tue, 2015-02-03 at 07:58 +0100, Alexander Holler wrote:
> Am 03.02.2015 um 07:05 schrieb Al Viro:
> > On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 06:05:09PM +0100, Alexander Holler wrote:
> >> + if (inode) {
> >> + // TODO:
> >> + // if (inode is file and 's' flag is set)
> >> + // secure = true;
> >> + if (!secure)
> >> + iput(inode); /* truncate the inode here */
> >> + else {
> >> + struct super_block *sb = inode->i_sb;
> >> + if (sb->s_op->set_secure_delete)
> >> + sb->s_op->set_secure_delete(sb, true);
> >> + // TODO: We should fail if secure isn't supported,
> >> + // look up how that's possible here.
> >> + iput(inode); /* truncate the inode here */
> >> + // TODO: check if sb is still valid after the inode is gone
> >> + sync_filesystem(sb);
> >> + if (sb->s_op->set_secure_delete)
> >> + sb->s_op->set_secure_delete(sb, false);
> >> + }
> >
> > Charming. Now, what exactly happens if two such syscalls overlap in time?
>
> What do you think will happen? I assume you haven't looked at how I've
> implemented set_secure_delete(). CHarming.
Chill, why don't you.
--
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