d to
USER_READABLE >= GROUP_READABLE >= OTHER_READABLE,
USER_WRITABLE >= GROUP_WRITABLE and OTHER_WRITABLE is not permitted.
Signed-off-by: Gobinda Charan Maji
---
include/linux/kernel.h | 18 ++
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/kernel.h b/
,
USER_WRITABLE = GROUP_WRITABLE and OTHER_WRITABLE is not permitted.
Signed-off-by: Gobinda Charan Maji gobinda.cem...@gmail.com
---
include/linux/kernel.h | 18 ++
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/kernel.h b/include/linux/kernel.h
index
Rusty Russell rustcorp.com.au> writes:
>
> This check was introduced in 2006 by Alexey Dobriyan (9774a1f54f173)
> for module parameters; we removed it when we unified the check into
> VERIFY_OCTAL_PERMISSIONS() as sysfs didn't have the same requirement.
> Now all those users are fixed,
Rusty Russell rusty at rustcorp.com.au writes:
This check was introduced in 2006 by Alexey Dobriyan (9774a1f54f173)
for module parameters; we removed it when we unified the check into
VERIFY_OCTAL_PERMISSIONS() as sysfs didn't have the same requirement.
Now all those users are fixed,
Robert Jarzmik free.fr> writes:
As per the newly added restriction (User perms >= group perms >= other
perms) is concerned, there is an inconsistency in the permission. Say for
example, permission value is "0432". Here User has only READ permission
whereas Group has both WRITE and EXECUTE
Robert Jarzmik robert.jarzmik at free.fr writes:
As per the newly added restriction (User perms = group perms = other
perms) is concerned, there is an inconsistency in the permission. Say for
example, permission value is 0432. Here User has only READ permission
whereas Group has both WRITE and
Gobinda Charan Maji gmail.com> writes:
>
> Hi All,
>
> I could not get any response yet.
>
> Hi Rusty,
>
> Please at least give me a reply even if my concept seems to be incorrect to
> you.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Gobinda
>
>
Hi All,
I a
Gobinda Charan Maji gobinda.cemk07 at gmail.com writes:
Hi All,
I could not get any response yet.
Hi Rusty,
Please at least give me a reply even if my concept seems to be incorrect to
you.
Thanks in advance,
Gobinda
Hi All,
I am new to this mail chain. I could not get any
Gobinda Charan Maji gmail.com> writes:
>
> Hi All,
>
> As per the newly added restriction (User perms >= group perms >= other
> perms) is concerned, there is an inconsistency in the permission. Say for
> example, permission value is "0432". Here Use
Gobinda Charan Maji gobinda.cemk07 at gmail.com writes:
Hi All,
As per the newly added restriction (User perms = group perms = other
perms) is concerned, there is an inconsistency in the permission. Say for
example, permission value is 0432. Here User has only READ permission
Robert Jarzmik free.fr> writes:
>
> Dave Jones redhat.com> writes:
>
> > On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 01:43:44PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
> >
> > > drivers/mtd/devices/docg3.c:
> > > __ATTR(f##id##_dps0_protection_key, S_IWUGO, NULL,
dps0_insert_key), \
> > >
Robert Jarzmik robert.jarzmik at free.fr writes:
Dave Jones davej at redhat.com writes:
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 01:43:44PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
drivers/mtd/devices/docg3.c:
__ATTR(f##id##_dps0_protection_key, S_IWUGO, NULL,
dps0_insert_key), \
12 matches
Mail list logo
