Sorry for off-topic, I am just curios.
On 08/22, Willy Tarreau wrote:
>
> It's not only that, it also supports sockets and pipes that you can access
> via /proc/pid/fd and not via a real symlink which would try to open eg
> "pipe:[23456]" instead of the real file.
But sock_no_open() disallows this, and for good reason I guess.
I am wondering, perhaps anon_inode should do the same? I do not
see any problem, but it looks pointless and misleading to allow
to open a file you can do nothing with.
Or is there any reason why, say, open("anon_inode:[perf_event]")
should succeed?
Thanks,
Oleg.
--- x/fs/anon_inodes.c
+++ x/fs/anon_inodes.c
@@ -24,7 +24,15 @@
static struct vfsmount *anon_inode_mnt __read_mostly;
static struct inode *anon_inode_inode;
-static const struct file_operations anon_inode_fops;
+
+static int anon_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
+{
+ return -ENXIO;
+}
+
+static const struct file_operations anon_inode_fops = {
+ .open = anon_open,
+};
/*
* anon_inodefs_dname() is called from d_path().
--
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
