[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wiSmez2LFEpM05VUX=_GKJC8Ag68TJDByVPO=x4QwjyuA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2025 08:04:28 +0900
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-aio@...ck.org, linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org,
linux-erofs@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org,
linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org, samba-technical@...ts.samba.org,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/16] act: use credential guards in acct_write_process()
On Mon, 3 Nov 2025 at 20:27, Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> /* Perform file operations on behalf of whoever enabled accounting */
> - cred = override_creds(file->f_cred);
> -
> + with_creds(file->f_cred);
I'd almost prefer if we *only* did "scoped_with_creds()" and didn't
have this version at all.
Most of the cases want that anyway, and the couple of plain
"with_creds()" cases look like they would only be cleaned up by making
the cred scoping more explicit.
What do you think?
Anyway, I approve of the whole series, obviously, I just suspect we
could narrow down the new interface a bit more.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists