On Mon, Apr 16, 2007 at 06:11:30PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote: > On Thursday 12 April 2007 12:06, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > Once again very strong NACK. Every conditional passing of vfsmounts get my > > veto. As mentioned last time if you really want this send a patch series > > first that passed the vfsmount consistantly. > > I don't consider it fair to NACK this patch just because some other part of > the kernel uses vfs_create() in the wrong way -- those are really independent > issues. The bug is not that hard to fix though; here is a proposed patch on > top of the other AppArmor patches. Note that it's not just this particular hunk, all these kinds of conditional passing are wrong. > > The offenders are nfsd and the mqueue filesystem. Instantiate a struct > nameidata there. > > The .dentry and .mnt fields can easily be filled in in nfsd. The mqueue > filesystem is somewhat special: files that mq_open creates are on an internal > mount and the mqueue filesystem is not generally visible (it may or may not > be mounted). When passing a regular vfsmount to vfs_create the files would > appear disconnected while they actually are kernel-internal objects. Use a > NULL vfsmount there to avoid that -- passing the kernel-internal vfsmount > there wouldn't help, anyway. But anyway, creating fake nameidata structures is not really helpful. If there is a nameidata passed people expect it to be complete, and if you pass them to an LSM people will e.g. try to look into lookup intents. But similar to the per-mountpoint r/o work I suspect you're simply operating on the wrong level, but then again this might not be fixable due to the braindead apparmor design. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
