Re: [PATCH 0/2] Shared flags

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 04:58:17PM +0300, Pavel Shilovsky wrote:
> > #define O_DENYREAD      004000000 /* Do not permit read access */
> > #define O_DENYWRITE     010000000 /* Do not permit write access */
> > #define O_DENYDELETE  020000000 /* Do not permit delete or rename operations*/

>  (2) you also need to enforce these semantics in the VFS for local
>      filesystems
> 
> Now if (2) doesn't cause too much overhead I would say it's fine, if not
> I would rather avoid it.

On the face of it, they look like they have similar denial-of-service
potential as mandatory locks.  For example, a root process cleaning
out /tmp gets stuck because a user process has O_DENYDELETE set.

-- Jamie
--
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

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]
  Powered by Linux