linux-kernel - Re: Do we really need d_weak

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, 08 Sep 2017 16:15:49 +0100
From:   David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To:     Ian Kent <ikent@...hat.com>
Cc:     dhowells@...hat.com, NeilBrown <neilb@...e.com>,
        "viro@...iv.linux.org.uk" <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>,
        Trond Myklebust <trondmy@...marydata.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "mkoutny@...e.com" <mkoutny@...e.com>,
        "linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@...il.com>
Subject: Re: Do we really need d_weak_revalidate???

Ian Kent <ikent@...hat.com> wrote:

> So far only David commented about using ENOENT rather than EREMOTE.
> 
> I prefer ENOENT for this case myself and he didn't object when I
> explained why, David, any concerns?

Not really - it just seems EREMOTE is a better fit since there is something
there, we're just not allowed to follow it.  This is different to a dangling
symlink IMO.

David