on 2022/4/15 22:17, Christian Brauner wrote: > On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 07:02:18PM +0800, Yang Xu wrote: >> If underflying filesystem doesn't enable own CONFIG_FS_POSIX_ACL, then >> posix_acl_create can't be called. So we will miss umask strip, ie >> use ext4 with noacl or disblae CONFIG_EXT4_FS_POSIX_ACL. > > Hm, maybe: > > "All creation paths except for O_TMPFILE handle umask in the vfs > directly if the filesystem doesn't support or enable POSIX ACLs. If the > filesystem does then umask handling is deferred until > posix_acl_create(). > Because, O_TMPFILE misses umask handling in the vfs it will not honor > umask settings. Fix this by adding the missing umask handling." OK, will do it on v4. Best Regards Yang Xu > >> >> Reported-by: Christian Brauner (Microsoft)<brauner@xxxxxxxxxx> >> Signed-off-by: Yang Xu<xuyang2018.jy@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> --- > > Acked-by: Christian Brauner (Microsoft)<brauner@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> fs/namei.c | 2 ++ >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/fs/namei.c b/fs/namei.c >> index 3f1829b3ab5b..bbc7c950bbdc 100644 >> --- a/fs/namei.c >> +++ b/fs/namei.c >> @@ -3521,6 +3521,8 @@ struct dentry *vfs_tmpfile(struct user_namespace *mnt_userns, >> child = d_alloc(dentry,&slash_name); >> if (unlikely(!child)) >> goto out_err; >> + if (!IS_POSIXACL(dir)) >> + mode&= ~current_umask(); >> error = dir->i_op->tmpfile(mnt_userns, dir, child, mode); >> if (error) >> goto out_err; >> -- >> 2.27.0 >>
