From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Al Viro Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/1] mount: universally disallow mounting over symlinks Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 14:48:31 +0000 Message-ID: <20200115144831.GJ8904@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20200102035920.dsycgxnb6ba2jhz2@yavin.dot.cyphar.com> <20200103014901.GC8904@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20200108031314.GE8904@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20200110210719.ktg3l2kwjrdutlh6@yavin> <20200114045733.GW8904@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20200114200150.ryld4npoblns2ybe@yavin> <20200115142517.GI8904@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20200115142906.saagd2lse7i7njux@yavin> <20200115143459.l4wurqyetkmptsdm@yavin> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200115143459.l4wurqyetkmptsdm@yavin> Sender: linux-api-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Aleksa Sarai Cc: Linus Torvalds , David Howells , Eric Biederman , stable , Christian Brauner , Serge Hallyn , dev-IGmTWi+3HBZvNhPySn5qfx2eb7JE58TQ@public.gmane.org, Linux Containers , Linux API , linux-fsdevel , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Ian Kent List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 01:34:59AM +1100, Aleksa Sarai wrote: > On 2020-01-16, Aleksa Sarai wrote: > > On 2020-01-15, Al Viro wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 07:01:50AM +1100, Aleksa Sarai wrote: > > > > > > > Yes, there were two patches I sent a while ago[1]. I can re-send them if > > > > you like. The second patch switches open_how->mode to a u64, but I'm > > > > still on the fence about whether that makes sense to do... > > > > > > IMO plain __u64 is better than games with __aligned_u64 - all sizes are > > > fixed, so... > > > > > > > [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20191219105533.12508-1-cyphar-gVpy/LI/lHzQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org/ > > > > > > Do you want that series folded into "open: introduce openat2(2) syscall" > > > and "selftests: add openat2(2) selftests" or would you rather have them > > > appended at the end of the series. Personally I'd go for "fold them in" > > > if it had been about my code, but it's really up to you. > > > > "fold them in" would probably be better to avoid making the mainline > > history confusing afterwards. Thanks. > > Also (if you prefer) I can send a v3 which uses u64s rather than > aligned_u64s. Could you fold and resend the results of folding (i.e. replacements for two commits in question)? The hard part is, of course, in updating commit messages ;-)