[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190904062229.GA66871@JATN>
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2019 00:22:29 -0600
From: Kelsey Skunberg <skunberg.kelsey@...il.com>
To: Don Dutile <ddutile@...hat.com>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
Bodong Wang <bodong@...lanox.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH v2 2/3] PCI: sysfs: Change
permissions from symbolic to octal
On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 10:37:13AM -0400, Don Dutile wrote:
> On 08/14/2019 01:38 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > [+cc Bodong, Don, Greg for permission question]
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 02:45:12PM -0600, Kelsey Skunberg wrote:
> > > Symbolic permissions such as "(S_IWUSR | S_IWGRP)" are not
> > > preferred and octal permissions should be used instead. Change all
> > > symbolic permissions to octal permissions.
> > >
> > > Example of old:
> > >
> > > "(S_IWUSR | S_IWGRP)"
> > >
> > > Example of new:
> > >
> > > "0220"
> >
> >
> > > static DEVICE_ATTR_RO(sriov_totalvfs);
> > > -static DEVICE_ATTR(sriov_numvfs, (S_IRUGO | S_IWUSR | S_IWGRP),
> > > - sriov_numvfs_show, sriov_numvfs_store);
> > > +static DEVICE_ATTR(sriov_numvfs, 0664, sriov_numvfs_show, sriov_numvfs_store);
> > > static DEVICE_ATTR_RO(sriov_offset);
> > > static DEVICE_ATTR_RO(sriov_stride);
> > > static DEVICE_ATTR_RO(sriov_vf_device);
> > > -static DEVICE_ATTR(sriov_drivers_autoprobe, (S_IRUGO | S_IWUSR | S_IWGRP),
> > > - sriov_drivers_autoprobe_show, sriov_drivers_autoprobe_store);
> > > +static DEVICE_ATTR(sriov_drivers_autoprobe, 0664, sriov_drivers_autoprobe_show,
> > > + sriov_drivers_autoprobe_store);
> >
> > Greg noticed that sriov_numvfs and sriov_drivers_autoprobe have
> > "unusual" permissions. These were added by:
> >
> > 0e7df22401a3 ("PCI: Add sysfs sriov_drivers_autoprobe to control VF driver binding")
> > 1789382a72a5 ("PCI: SRIOV control and status via sysfs")
> >
> > Kelsey's patch correctly preserves the existing permissions, but we
> > should double-check that they are the permissions they want, and
> > possibly add a comment about why they're different from the rest.
> >
> > Bjorn
> >
Hi Don,
> The rest being? ... 0644 vs 0664 ?
> The file is read & written, thus the (first) 6; I'll have to dig through very old (7 yr) notes to see if the second 6 is needed for libvirt (so it doesn't have to be root to enable).
>
> -dd
>
Were you able to see if the unusual permissions (0664) are needed for
libvirt? I appreciate your help!
-Kelsey
Powered by blists - more mailing lists