On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 16:33:23 -0400 Trond Myklebust <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What is so bloody difficult about remembering to support ATTR_KILL_SUID > ATTR_KILL_SGID vs all the other ATTR_* flags if you are choosing to > implement your own .setattr? > As long as there exists a simple VFS helper to do the translation into > an ATTR_MODE request, so that those filesystems that rely on the current > translation by 'notify_change' can easily migrate, then I can't see why > this is such a problem. >
You're quite right. If you declare your own .setattr, then you ought to know what you're doing. My concern was more about the breadth of the change and how best to make sure we don't open security holes with this. On the technical side, I don't think we can just move this into inode_setattr. The ia_mode really needs to be set before inode_change_ok is called. So I think we'll have to make sure that all .setattr ops call the helper explicitly. I'm working on a patchset now and hope to have something together in a few days. -- Jeff Layton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
