[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFznwKKy0Vj4Wxe16=2EUmgas_Dcr9QQ1tOJOQOEAVfr+w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 18:48:30 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 24/32] vfs: syscall: Add fsopen() to prepare for
superblock creation [ver #9]
On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 6:15 PM Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>
> Umm... How about "use credentials of opener for everything"?
yeah, we have that for writes in general.
Nobody ever actually follows that rule. They may *think* they do, and
then they call to some helper that does "capability(CAP_SYS_WHATEVAH)"
without even realizing it.
But I'm certainly ok with writes, if it's just filling a buffer.
Preferably a standard buffer we already have, like a seqfile or pipe
(hey, splice!) or whatever.
And then you have that final op to actually "commit" the state. Which
shouldn't be a write (and not the close).
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists