On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 7:45 PM, Miklos Szeredi <miklos@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, 14 Jan 2011, Nick Piggin wrote: >> On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 3:18 AM, Miklos Szeredi <miklos@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Surely you'd need some filtering anyway? I don't think any function >> involving path lookup could sanely return -ECHILD. > > No, but not filtering doesn't normally hurt. And it's not quite > trivial deciding what should be allowed and what shoudln't, and the > filter would have to be updated for each addition of a new errno. So > I'm not sure I want to go there. Well if you allow untrusted filesystems it is possible that -ECHILD return will do something a bit silly. So it would be good to filter it I guess. >> That said, it probably is a good idea to have a new errno. > > Yeah, that makes the fitering much easier. How so? Would -ECHILD ever be sane to return? I'm not arguing against changing it but I just want to know what the issue is there. -- 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
