Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx>: > On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 3:31 PM, Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 02:20:15PM -0400, Amir Goldstein wrote: >> >>> Well, the behavior was changed in kernel 4.7 (and stable kernels) by >>> commit by Al Viro: >>> fac7d19 fix EOPENSTALE bug in do_last() >>> >>> Since that commit userspace will be able to see this error in >>> fanotify events. >> >> Unless *notify somehow uses do_last() directly, that commit should >> have no effect on it (and it definitely has no effect on >> dentry_open() callers)... > > Right. I'm being silly :/ > > Back to Redhat I guess... I will gladly take the issue to RedHat. However, the discussion so far confuses me a bit. To confirm, is there a consensus here that EOPENSTALE should never leak to userspace (through fanotify read anyway)? If EOPENSTALE *is* a valid possible return from fanotify read, this is my bug and not RedHat's. In that case, what is the correct recovery? As for reproduction, I don't yet have one. At the moment, I just need an authoritative user-space API clarification. Marko
