On Tue, 2007-04-24 at 17:35 +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > On Tue 24-04-07 10:14:37, Dave Kleikamp wrote: > > I think you need a call to ext3_get_inode_flags in one more place. In > > ext3_ioctl(), EXT3_IOC_SETFLAGS modifies the flags based on what is in > > ei->i_flags, so this code should make sure that ei->i_flags is in sync > > with inode->i_flags. > Hmm, I don't think so. The code does: > flags = flags & EXT3_FL_USER_MODIFIABLE; > flags |= oldflags & ~EXT3_FL_USER_MODIFIABLE; > ei->i_flags = flags; > So all EXT3_FL_USER_MODIFIABLE are overwritten by what user has supplied, > which happens to be a superset of flags influenced by > ext3_get_inode_flags(). On the other hand, from some point of view, after your > change the code is safer (in case we add some new unmodifiable flags) so I > don't object against adding the call. I just wanted to point out, that > currently there's no difference... Okay. I see that that's the case. I was thinking that individual flags could be set through the ioctl, but it takes the whole set. I don't really see the need to keep my patch from a safety perspective, but do what you want. Thanks, Shaggy -- David Kleikamp IBM Linux Technology Center - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
