Re: [nameidata 1/2] Don't pass NULL nameidata to vfs_create

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Mon, Apr 16, 2007 at 06:11:30PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> On Thursday 12 April 2007 12:06, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > Once again very strong NACK.  Every conditional passing of vfsmounts get my
> > veto.  As mentioned last time if you really want this send a patch series
> > first that passed the vfsmount consistantly.
> 
> I don't consider it fair to NACK this patch just because some other part of 
> the kernel uses vfs_create() in the wrong way -- those are really independent 
> issues. The bug is not that hard to fix though; here is a proposed patch on 
> top of the other AppArmor patches.

Note that it's not just this particular hunk, all these kinds of conditional
passing are wrong.

> 
> The offenders are nfsd and the mqueue filesystem. Instantiate a struct 
> nameidata there.
> 
> The .dentry and .mnt fields can easily be filled in in nfsd. The mqueue 
> filesystem is somewhat special: files that mq_open creates are on an internal 
> mount and the mqueue filesystem is not generally visible (it may or may not 
> be mounted). When passing a regular vfsmount to vfs_create the files would 
> appear disconnected while they actually are kernel-internal objects. Use a 
> NULL vfsmount there to avoid that -- passing the kernel-internal vfsmount 
> there wouldn't help, anyway.

But anyway, creating fake nameidata structures is not really helpful.
If there is a nameidata passed people expect it to be complete, and
if you pass them to an LSM people will e.g. try to look into lookup
intents.  But similar to the per-mountpoint r/o work I suspect you're
simply operating on the wrong level, but then again this might not
be fixable due to the braindead apparmor design.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/