On Fri, 24 Sep 2010 11:54:23 -0400, Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Sep 2010 18:18:11 +0530
> "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > From: Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@xxxxxxx>
> >
> > Some permission models distinguish between the permission to create a
> > non-directory and a directory. Pass this information down to
> > inode_permission() as mask flags
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@xxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > fs/namei.c | 21 ++++++++++++---------
> > include/linux/fs.h | 2 ++
> > 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/namei.c b/fs/namei.c
> > index b0b8a71..ed786b2 100644
> > --- a/fs/namei.c
> > +++ b/fs/namei.c
> > @@ -253,7 +253,8 @@ int generic_permission(struct inode *inode, int mask,
> > * for filesystem access without changing the "normal" uids which
> > * are used for other things.
> > *
> > - * When checking for MAY_APPEND, MAY_WRITE must also be set in @mask.
> > + * When checking for MAY_APPEND, MAY_CREATE_FILE, MAY_CREATE_DIR,
> > + * MAY_WRITE must also be set in @mask.
> > */
> > int inode_permission(struct inode *inode, int mask)
> > {
> > @@ -1337,13 +1338,15 @@ static int may_delete(struct inode *dir,struct dentry *victim,int isdir)
> > * 3. We should have write and exec permissions on dir
> > * 4. We can't do it if dir is immutable (done in permission())
> > */
> > -static inline int may_create(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *child)
> > +static inline int may_create(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *child, int isdir)
> ^^^^^
> nit: maybe saner as a bool?
> > {
> > + int mask = isdir ? MAY_CREATE_DIR : MAY_CREATE_FILE;
> > +
> > if (child->d_inode)
> > return -EEXIST;
> > if (IS_DEADDIR(dir))
> > return -ENOENT;
> > - return inode_permission(dir, MAY_WRITE | MAY_EXEC);
> > + return inode_permission(dir, MAY_WRITE | MAY_EXEC | mask);
> > }
> >
> > /*
> > @@ -1391,7 +1394,7 @@ void unlock_rename(struct dentry *p1, struct dentry *p2)
> > int vfs_create(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry, int mode,
> > struct nameidata *nd)
> > {
> > - int error = may_create(dir, dentry);
> > + int error = may_create(dir, dentry, 0);
> >
> > if (error)
> > return error;
> > @@ -1953,7 +1956,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(lookup_create);
> >
> > int vfs_mknod(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry, int mode, dev_t dev)
> > {
> > - int error = may_create(dir, dentry);
> > + int error = may_create(dir, dentry, 0);
> >
> > if (error)
> > return error;
> > @@ -2057,7 +2060,7 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE3(mknod, const char __user *, filename, int, mode, unsigned, dev)
> >
> > int vfs_mkdir(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry, int mode)
> > {
> > - int error = may_create(dir, dentry);
> > + int error = may_create(dir, dentry, 1);
> >
> > if (error)
> > return error;
> > @@ -2342,7 +2345,7 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE1(unlink, const char __user *, pathname)
> >
> > int vfs_symlink(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry, const char *oldname)
> > {
> > - int error = may_create(dir, dentry);
> > + int error = may_create(dir, dentry, 0);
> >
> > if (error)
> > return error;
> > @@ -2415,7 +2418,7 @@ int vfs_link(struct dentry *old_dentry, struct inode *dir, struct dentry *new_de
> > if (!inode)
> > return -ENOENT;
> >
> > - error = may_create(dir, new_dentry);
> > + error = may_create(dir, new_dentry, S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode));
>
> ^^^^ this is a little
> scary, but even if it's
> a directory, it'll get
> kicked out in a later
> check. Would it be
> clearer to move up the
> S_ISDIR() check in this
> function and then pass
> this in as false?
Can you elaborate on this ?
-aneesh
--
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
