Le dimanche 15 mai 2011 Ã 08:14 -0700, Andi Kleen a Ãcrit : > Alex Davis <alex14641@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > In fs/udf/inode.c, line 1455, linux 2.6.35, there is the following code: > > > > udfperms = ((inode->i_mode & S_IRWXO)) | > > ((inode->i_mode & S_IRWXG) << 2) | > > ((inode->i_mode & S_IRWXU) << 4); > > > > Shouldn't we be shifting by 3 bits? i.e: > > udfperms = ((inode->i_mode & S_IRWXO)) | > > ((inode->i_mode & S_IRWXG) << 3) | > > ((inode->i_mode & S_IRWXU) << 6); > > > > The S_I.. constants are all defined in include/linux/stat.h as 3-bit values. > > > > I will send a patch if needed. > > I would suggest you test it first. Put in a UDF disk that triggers > this case (verify with a printk). Check in ls -l if the > permissions are correct or wrong. Well, no need to test ;) Existing code is fine AFAIK. fs/udf/ecma_167.h /* Permissions (ECMA 167r3 4/14.9.5) */ #define FE_PERM_O_EXEC 0x00000001U #define FE_PERM_O_WRITE 0x00000002U #define FE_PERM_O_READ 0x00000004U #define FE_PERM_O_CHATTR 0x00000008U #define FE_PERM_O_DELETE 0x00000010U #define FE_PERM_G_EXEC 0x00000020U #define FE_PERM_G_WRITE 0x00000040U #define FE_PERM_G_READ 0x00000080U #define FE_PERM_G_CHATTR 0x00000100U #define FE_PERM_G_DELETE 0x00000200U #define FE_PERM_U_EXEC 0x00000400U #define FE_PERM_U_WRITE 0x00000800U #define FE_PERM_U_READ 0x00001000U #define FE_PERM_U_CHATTR 0x00002000U #define FE_PERM_U_DELETE 0x00004000U So Other bits (inode->i_mode & S_IRWXO) really maps to FE_PERM_O_EXEC/WRITE/READ For Group bits (inode->i_mode & S_IRWXG) we must shift by 2 bits to the left to make them match FE_PERM_G_EXEC/WRITE/READ (to skip O_CHATR/O_DELETE) For Owner/User bits (inode->i_mode & S_IRWXU) we must shift by 4 bits for same reason. -- 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
