On 9/6/19 4:17 AM, David Howells wrote:
> Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> There doesn't seem to be a strong reason to have another copy of the
>> filesystem name string in the fs_parameter_description structure;
>> it's easy enough to get the name from the fs_type, and using it
>> instead ensures consistency across messages (for example,
>> vfs_parse_fs_param() already uses fc->fs_type->name for the error
>> messages, because it doesn't have the fs_parameter_description).
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> It was put there for fs_validate_description() to use. That checks both
> filesystem and LSM parameter descriptions.
>
> We could pass a name in to that function instead.
My patch does exactly that, right?
diff --git a/fs/filesystems.c b/fs/filesystems.c
index 9135646e41ac..77bf5f95362d 100644
--- a/fs/filesystems.c
+++ b/fs/filesystems.c
@@ -74,7 +74,8 @@ int register_filesystem(struct file_system_type * fs)
int res = 0;
struct file_system_type ** p;
- if (fs->parameters && !fs_validate_description(fs->parameters))
+ if (fs->parameters &&
+ !fs_validate_description(fs->name, fs->parameters))
return -EINVAL;
....
@@ -7021,7 +7020,7 @@ static __init int selinux_init(void)
else
pr_debug("SELinux: Starting in permissive mode\n");
- fs_validate_description(&selinux_fs_parameters);
+ fs_validate_description("selinux", &selinux_fs_parameters);
return 0;
