On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 08:50:16PM +0400, Pavel Shilovsky wrote: > 2013/2/7 J. Bruce Fields <bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > That would be a bug, I think. E.g. "man 3posix open": > > > > No files shall be created or modified if the function returns > > -1. > > > > Looking at the code... See the references to FILE_CREATED in > > atomic_open--looks like that's trying to prevent may_open from failing > > in this case. > > > >> I think > >> there is no difference between this case and the situation with > >> deny_lock_file there. > > > > Looks to me like it would be a bug in either case. > > Then we returned from lookup_open in do_last we go to 'opened' lable. > Then we have a 3(!) chances to return -1 while a file is created > (open_check_o_direct, ima_file_check, handle_truncate I don't know about the first two, but handle_truncate won't be hit since will_truncate is false. > ). In this case > these places are bugs too. > > We can call vfs_unlink if we failed after a file was created, but > possible affects need to be investigated. We definitely don't want to try to undo the create with an unlink. --b. -- 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
