> Well initially I when I tried to investigate what’s wrong, and found that the old logic was the culprit, I did some logging to see what exactly was wrong. The log patch is here btw :- https://github.com/AdityaGarg8/linux/commit/f668fb012f595d83053020b88b9439c295b4dc21 > > So I saw that the old logic was always false, no matter whether I mounted with uid or not. > > I tried to see what makes this true, but couldn't succeed. So, I thought of a simpler approach and changed the logic itself. > > To be honest, I dunno what is the old logic for. Maybe instead of completely removing the old logic, I could use an OR? > > If you think its more logical, I can make this change :- > > - if (!i_gid_read(inode) && !mode) > + if ((test_bit(HFSPLUS_SB_UID, &sbi->flags)) || (!i_uid_read(inode) && !mode)) > > Thanks > Aditya > > I continuation with this message, I also think the bits should be set only if (!uid_valid(sbi->uid) is false, else the bits may be set even if UID is invalid? So, do you think the change given below should be good for this? diff --git a/fs/hfsplus/options.c b/fs/hfsplus/options.c index 047e05c57..c94a58762 100644 --- a/fs/hfsplus/options.c +++ b/fs/hfsplus/options.c @@ -140,6 +140,8 @@ int hfsplus_parse_options(char *input, struct hfsplus_sb_info *sbi) if (!uid_valid(sbi->uid)) { pr_err("invalid uid specified\n"); return 0; + } else { + set_bit(HFSPLUS_SB_UID, &sbi->flags); } break; case opt_gid: @@ -151,6 +153,8 @@ int hfsplus_parse_options(char *input, struct hfsplus_sb_info *sbi) if (!gid_valid(sbi->gid)) { pr_err("invalid gid specified\n"); return 0; + } else { + set_bit(HFSPLUS_SB_GID, &sbi->flags); } break; case opt_part:
