linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] statx: Add a system call to make enhanced file info available

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]

Date:   Fri, 18 Nov 2016 07:01:49 -0500
From:   Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>
To:     David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc:     linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] statx: Add a system call to make enhanced file info
 available

On Fri, 2016-11-18 at 08:48 +0000, David Howells wrote:
> Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > > 
> > > If neither AT_STATX_*_SYNC flag is set, the behaviour is the default for
> > > stat() on that filesystem.
> > > 
> > 
> > We also need to specify here what happens if both bits are set. Should
> > that be -EINVAL?
> 
> Makes sense.
> 
> This leads to another thought: should fstatat() be allowed to take AT_STATX_*
> flags?
> 
> David

In principle, we could. fstatat currently rejects flags that it doesn't
understand with -EINVAL.

That said, I'd vote no -- if you wanted to change an application to
start setting these flags in fstatat calls, then it's just as simple to
convert it over to use statx. I don't see a lot of benefit in adding
that to a legacy syscall.

-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>