On Wed, Apr 08, 2015 at 06:34:12PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> + if (ancestor) {
> + mark_violated_mounts(dentry, ancestor);
> + mark_violated_mounts(target, ancestor);
> + }
Umm... Both sides the same way, regardless of whether it's exchange or
move? Looks wrong...
Look:
mkdir /tmp/a
mkdir /tmp/b
mkdir /tmp/c
mkdir /tmp/b/c
touch /tmp/a/x
mount --bind /tmp/b /tmp/c
mv /tmp/a/x /tmp/b/c/x
should that make the vfsmount on /tmp/c violated? And if so, why?
--
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
