Re: [PATCH 03/11] VFS: Add security label support to *notify

[Josef 'Jeff' Sipek]

On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 03:39:30PM -0500, Dave Quigley wrote:
...
> > Alright...so, few things...
> > 
> > 1) why do you need the locked/unlocked versions?
> > 
> > 2) instead of passing a flag to a common function, why not have:
> > 
> > vfs_setxattr_locked(....)
> > {
> > 	// original code minus the lock/unlock calls
> > }
> > 
> > vfs_setxattr(....)
> > {
> > 	mutex_lock(...);
> > 	vfs_setxattr_locked(...);
> > 	mutex_unlock(...);
> > }
> 
> What we do and what you propose aren't logically equivalent. There is a
> permission check inside vfs_setxattr before the mutex lock.

Ah, right. I didn't notice the @@ line...

Josef 'Jeff' Sipek.

-- 
Keyboard not found!
Press F1 to enter Setup
--
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/