On Thu, 30 May 2024 at 03:32, Christian Brauner <brauner@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Ofc depends on whether Linus still agrees that removing this might be
> something we could try.
I _definitely_ do not want to see any more complex deny_write_access().
So yes, if people have good reasons to override the inode write
access, I'd rather remove it entirely than make it some eldritch
horror that is even worse than what we have now.
It would obviously have to be tested in case some odd case actually
depends on the ETXTBSY semantics, since we *have* supported it for a
long time. But iirc nobody even noticed when we removed it from
shared libraries, so...
That said, verity seems to depend on it as a way to do the
"enable_verity()" atomically with no concurrent writes, and I see some
i_writecount noise in the integrity code too.
But maybe that's just a belt-and-suspenders thing?
Because if execve() no longer does it, I think we should just remove
that i_writecount thing entirely.
Linus
