On Thu, 9 Oct 2008, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
>
> Your patch still ignores O_APPEND, is that what we want? It sounds
> sort of strange. pwrite() for example honors O_APPEND and ignores the
> position, AFAICS.
You're right. We can (and should) just check O_APPEND, because it must be
set if IS_APPEND() is set on the inode.
And yeah, IS_IMMUTABLE is checked at open too. So no worries.
And it turns out that handling O_APPEND is actually pretty easy, so
instead of doing -EINVAL, we can just implement it. Something like this
(untested, of course).
Does this look better?
Linus
---
fs/splice.c | 6 ++++++
1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/splice.c b/fs/splice.c
index 1bbc6f4..8aca87b 100644
--- a/fs/splice.c
+++ b/fs/splice.c
@@ -1120,11 +1120,17 @@ static long do_splice(struct file *in, loff_t __user *off_in,
if (off_in)
return -ESPIPE;
if (off_out) {
+ if (out->f_flags & O_APPEND)
+ return -EINVAL;
if (out->f_op->llseek == no_llseek)
return -EINVAL;
if (copy_from_user(&offset, off_out, sizeof(loff_t)))
return -EFAULT;
off = &offset;
+ } else if (out->f_flags & O_APPEND) {
+ struct inode *inode = out->f_dentry->d_inode;
+ offset = i_size_read(inode);
+ off = &offset;
} else
off = &out->f_pos;
--
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
