On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 08:36:05AM -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 08:10:18AM -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 08:07:06AM -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > > So you're worried that a bug in the nfs code could modify the root and > > > then not restore it? > > > > At least the link you pointed to earlier never sets it back. > > This? http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1259986/focus=47687 > > + get_fs_root(current->fs, &root); > + set_fs_root(current->fs, &transport->root); > + > status = xs_local_finish_connecting(xprt, sock); > + > + set_fs_root(current->fs, &root); > + path_put(&root); > > > Instead > > of messing with it I'd rather have the sunrpc code use vfs_path_lookup > > and not care about current->fs->root at all. > > The annoyance is that the lookup happens somewhere lower down in the > networking code (net/unix/af_unix.c:unix_find_other, I think). So we'd > need some new (internal) API. We'd likely be the only user of that new > API. So, if the only drawback is really just the risk of introducing a bug that leaves the fs_root changed--the above seems simple enough for that not to be a great risk, right? Is there any other hazard to doing this that people can think of? --b. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
