From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 10:02:11 -0800 From: Greg KH To: Jonathan Cameron Cc: Drivers , stable@kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, "linux-iio@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: patch "Staging: iio: adis16220: fix up some sysfs attribute permissions" added to staging tree Message-ID: <20101118180211.GA5155@suse.de> References: <12899355293477@site> <4CE55CC1.6010507@cam.ac.uk> <20101118171950.GB4283@suse.de> <4CE5684A.8070404@cam.ac.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <4CE5684A.8070404@cam.ac.uk> List-ID: On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 05:54:18PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > On 11/18/10 17:19, Greg KH wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 05:05:05PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > >> On 11/16/10 19:25, gregkh@suse.de wrote: > >>> > >>> This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled > >>> > >>> Staging: iio: adis16220: fix up some sysfs attribute permissions > >>> > >>> to my staging git tree which can be found at > >>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/gregkh/staging-2.6.git > >>> in the staging-linus branch. > >>> > >>> The patch will show up in the next release of the linux-next tree > >>> (usually sometime within the next 24 hours during the week.) > >>> > >>> The patch will hopefully also will be merged in Linus's tree for the > >>> next -rc kernel release. > >>> > >>> If you have any questions about this process, please let me know. > >>> > >>> > >>> >From 1d904e8950c86e670ace237eaea1d48cd81e94df Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > >>> From: Greg Kroah-Hartman > >>> Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 11:19:53 -0800 > >>> Subject: Staging: iio: adis16220: fix up some sysfs attribute permissions > >>> > >>> They should not be writable by any user > >> Sorry Greg, it may be jet lag related, but I really don't see how this change > >> makes sense... Doesn't this take a write only parameter and make it read only > >> with no read function defined? Was the intent to restrict who could write > >> to this attribute? > > > > Ah crap. > > > >>> #define IIO_DEV_ATTR_CAPTURE(_store) \ > >>> - IIO_DEVICE_ATTR(capture, S_IWUGO, NULL, _store, 0) > >>> + IIO_DEVICE_ATTR(capture, S_IRUSR, NULL, _store, 0) > > > > This should be S_IWUSR, right? > Equivalent with that in and I'm happy to add my ack. > > Acked-by: Jonathan Cameron Thanks. And yes, I got all 7 of these patches wrong, I'll go redo them :( thanks for verifying and actually reviewing them, I appreciate it. greg k-h