On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 08:24:03PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 09:38:07AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote: > > The current tmpfile handler does not initialize default ACLs. Doing so > > within xfs_vn_tmpfile() makes it roughly equivalent to xfs_vn_mknod(), > > which is already used as a common create handler. > > > > xfs_vn_mknod() does not currently have a mechanism to determine whether > > to link the file into the namespace. Therefore, further abstract > > xfs_vn_mknod() into a new xfs_generic_create() handler with a tmpfile > > parameter. This new handler passes a NULL xname to the create and calls > > d_tmpfile() on the dentry when called via ->tmpfile(). > > > > Signed-off-by: Brian Foster <bfoster@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > > > Hi all, > > > > It appears that we want to initialize default ACLs for ->tmpfile() after > > all. This patch reintroduces the refactoring to initialize security and > > ACLs through the current xfs_vn_mknod(). This is based on top of the > > previously posted series: > > > > http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2014-04/msg00396.html > > > > Brian > ..... > > @@ -1053,25 +1074,7 @@ xfs_vn_tmpfile( > > struct dentry *dentry, > > umode_t mode) > > { > > - int error; > > - struct xfs_inode *ip; > > - struct inode *inode; > > - > > - error = xfs_create(XFS_I(dir), NULL, mode, 0, &ip); > > - if (unlikely(error)) > > - return -error; > > - > > - inode = VFS_I(ip); > > - > > - error = xfs_init_security(inode, dir, &dentry->d_name); > > - if (unlikely(error)) { > > - iput(inode); > > - return -error; > > - } > > - > > - d_tmpfile(dentry, inode); > > - > > - return 0; > > + return xfs_generic_create(dir, dentry, mode, 0, true); > > } > > This hunk doesn't apply to a 3.15-rc2 kernel - it calls > xfs_create_tmpfile(). Just applying it as is after fixing the hunk > causes a crash in xfs-create(), because the code in the patch is > calling xfs-create ratehr than xfs_create_tmpfile(). > Right, this is based on the previously posted series (link above), which fixes up xfs_create() such that we can use it from xfs_generic_create() via all associated codepaths. Sorry, I probably should have posted this as a [5/4 ...] patch to make that more clear... > Brian, can you regenerate this patch against a current linus tree > (3.15-rc4)? > It isn't clear to me what the expectation is with this series at this point, beyond the agreement that we do want to initialize the acls. It looks like the v1 patch that only initialized security is merged, so we're Ok as far as that goes. v2 added the bits to initialize the acls as well: http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2014-04/msg00182.html ... and followed up with the xfs_create_tmpfile() removal. Is that (minus the already merged selinux fix) what you're asking for here? v3 dropped the default acl bits and thus the xfs_generic_create() handler as well. The xfs_create_tmpfile() cleanup persisted, and now the default acl bits are required, so it's added back in this 5/4. Brian > Cheers, > > Dave. > -- > Dave Chinner > david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
