From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Cc: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, adobriyan@gmail.com,
viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH] proc: revalidate dentry returned by proc_pid_follow_link
Date: Sun, 08 Nov 2009 19:30:55 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m1hbt49xxs.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091108201237.79af5cac-PC62bkCOHzGdMjc06nkz3ljfA9RmPOcC@public.gmane.org> (Jeff Layton's message of "Sun\, 8 Nov 2009 20\:12\:37 -0500")
Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com> writes:
>> Hmm. Looking at the code I get the impression that a file bind mount
>> will have exactly the same problem.
>>
>> Can you confirm.
>>
>> If file bind mounts also have this problem a bugfix to to just
>> proc seems questionable.
>>
>
> I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "file bind mount". Is that
> something like mounting with "-o loop" ?
# cd /tmp
# echo foo > foo
# echo bar > bar
# mount --bind foo bar
# cat bar
foo
#
> I'm not at all opposed to fixing this in a more broad fashion, but as
> best I can tell, the only place that LAST_BIND is used is in procfs.
proc does appear to be the only user of LAST_BIND. With a file bind
mount we can get to the same ok: label without a revalidate. The
difference is that we came from __follow_mount instead of follow_link.
At least that is how I read the code.
Eric
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Cc: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, adobriyan@gmail.com,
viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH] proc: revalidate dentry returned by proc_pid_follow_link
Date: Sun, 08 Nov 2009 19:30:55 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m1hbt49xxs.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091108201237.79af5cac@tupile.poochiereds.net> (Jeff Layton's message of "Sun\, 8 Nov 2009 20\:12\:37 -0500")
Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com> writes:
>> Hmm. Looking at the code I get the impression that a file bind mount
>> will have exactly the same problem.
>>
>> Can you confirm.
>>
>> If file bind mounts also have this problem a bugfix to to just
>> proc seems questionable.
>>
>
> I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "file bind mount". Is that
> something like mounting with "-o loop" ?
# cd /tmp
# echo foo > foo
# echo bar > bar
# mount --bind foo bar
# cat bar
foo
#
> I'm not at all opposed to fixing this in a more broad fashion, but as
> best I can tell, the only place that LAST_BIND is used is in procfs.
proc does appear to be the only user of LAST_BIND. With a file bind
mount we can get to the same ok: label without a revalidate. The
difference is that we came from __follow_mount instead of follow_link.
At least that is how I read the code.
Eric
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: ebiederm-aS9lmoZGLiVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Jeff Layton <jlayton-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Jamie Lokier <jamie-yetKDKU6eevNLxjTenLetw@public.gmane.org>,
linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
linux-fsdevel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
linux-nfs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
adobriyan-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org,
viro-3bDd1+5oDREiFSDQTTA3OLVCufUGDwFn@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] proc: revalidate dentry returned by proc_pid_follow_link
Date: Sun, 08 Nov 2009 19:30:55 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m1hbt49xxs.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091108201237.79af5cac-PC62bkCOHzGdMjc06nkz3ljfA9RmPOcC@public.gmane.org> (Jeff Layton's message of "Sun\, 8 Nov 2009 20\:12\:37 -0500")
Jeff Layton <jlayton-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> writes:
>> Hmm. Looking at the code I get the impression that a file bind mount
>> will have exactly the same problem.
>>
>> Can you confirm.
>>
>> If file bind mounts also have this problem a bugfix to to just
>> proc seems questionable.
>>
>
> I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "file bind mount". Is that
> something like mounting with "-o loop" ?
# cd /tmp
# echo foo > foo
# echo bar > bar
# mount --bind foo bar
# cat bar
foo
#
> I'm not at all opposed to fixing this in a more broad fashion, but as
> best I can tell, the only place that LAST_BIND is used is in procfs.
proc does appear to be the only user of LAST_BIND. With a file bind
mount we can get to the same ok: label without a revalidate. The
difference is that we came from __follow_mount instead of follow_link.
At least that is how I read the code.
Eric
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-11-09 3:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-11-06 13:19 [PATCH] proc: revalidate dentry returned by proc_pid_follow_link Jeff Layton
2009-11-06 13:19 ` Jeff Layton
2009-11-06 20:36 ` Jamie Lokier
2009-11-06 21:06 ` Jeff Layton
2009-11-06 21:06 ` Jeff Layton
2009-11-08 10:15 ` Eric W. Biederman
[not found] ` <m17hu1miea.fsf-+imSwln9KH6u2/kzUuoCbdi2O/JbrIOy@public.gmane.org>
2009-11-09 1:12 ` Jeff Layton
2009-11-09 1:12 ` Jeff Layton
2009-11-09 1:12 ` Jeff Layton
[not found] ` <20091108201237.79af5cac-PC62bkCOHzGdMjc06nkz3ljfA9RmPOcC@public.gmane.org>
2009-11-09 3:30 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2009-11-09 3:30 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-11-09 3:30 ` Eric W. Biederman
[not found] ` <m1hbt49xxs.fsf-+imSwln9KH6u2/kzUuoCbdi2O/JbrIOy@public.gmane.org>
2009-11-09 13:11 ` Jeff Layton
2009-11-09 13:11 ` Jeff Layton
2009-11-09 13:11 ` Jeff Layton
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=m1hbt49xxs.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org \
--to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
--cc=jamie@shareable.org \
--cc=jlayton@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.