On Thursday 09 August 2007 01:24, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 11:41:06PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> > Lookup or not doesn't actually matter. Think of fchdir(2): it does a
> > permission check, and it should also pass down the LOOKUP_CHDIR flag.
>
> fchdir per
On Thursday 09 August 2007 01:24, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 11:41:06PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
Lookup or not doesn't actually matter. Think of fchdir(2): it does a
permission check, and it should also pass down the LOOKUP_CHDIR flag.
fchdir per defintion
On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 11:41:06PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> Lookup or not doesn't actually matter. Think of fchdir(2): it does a
> permission check, and it should also pass down the LOOKUP_CHDIR flag.
fchdir per defintion doesn't do any lookup, and it should not pretend to be
doing
On Wednesday 08 August 2007 21:25, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 07:16:26PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> > Create a temporary struct vfs_lookup in file_permission() instead of
> > passing a NULL value.
>
> NACK. file_permission is special in that it doesn't happen in
On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 07:16:26PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> Create a temporary struct vfs_lookup in file_permission() instead of
> passing a NULL value.
NACK. file_permission is special in that it doesn't happen in the
context of any kind of lookup operation, and the nd/intent
On Wednesday 08 August 2007 19:58, Josef Sipek wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 07:16:26PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> > Create a temporary struct vfs_lookup in file_permission() instead of
> > passing a NULL value.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Andreas Gruenbacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> >
On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 07:16:26PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> Create a temporary struct vfs_lookup in file_permission() instead of
> passing a NULL value.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andreas Gruenbacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> ---
> fs/namei.c | 11 ++-
> 1 file changed, 6
Create a temporary struct vfs_lookup in file_permission() instead of
passing a NULL value.
Signed-off-by: Andreas Gruenbacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
fs/namei.c | 11 ++-
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
--- a/fs/namei.c
+++ b/fs/namei.c
@@ -292,14 +292,15 @@ int
Create a temporary struct vfs_lookup in file_permission() instead of
passing a NULL value.
Signed-off-by: Andreas Gruenbacher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
fs/namei.c | 11 ++-
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
--- a/fs/namei.c
+++ b/fs/namei.c
@@ -292,14 +292,15 @@ int
On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 07:16:26PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
Create a temporary struct vfs_lookup in file_permission() instead of
passing a NULL value.
Signed-off-by: Andreas Gruenbacher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
fs/namei.c | 11 ++-
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5
On Wednesday 08 August 2007 19:58, Josef Sipek wrote:
On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 07:16:26PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
Create a temporary struct vfs_lookup in file_permission() instead of
passing a NULL value.
Signed-off-by: Andreas Gruenbacher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 07:16:26PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
Create a temporary struct vfs_lookup in file_permission() instead of
passing a NULL value.
NACK. file_permission is special in that it doesn't happen in the
context of any kind of lookup operation, and the nd/intent paramater
On Wednesday 08 August 2007 21:25, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 07:16:26PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
Create a temporary struct vfs_lookup in file_permission() instead of
passing a NULL value.
NACK. file_permission is special in that it doesn't happen in the
On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 11:41:06PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
Lookup or not doesn't actually matter. Think of fchdir(2): it does a
permission check, and it should also pass down the LOOKUP_CHDIR flag.
fchdir per defintion doesn't do any lookup, and it should not pretend to be
doing one.
14 matches
Mail list logo
