From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vfs: new FROM_ACCESS flag
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 09:48:16 +0100
Message-ID: <20090923084816.GA7687@shareable.org>
References: <20090921013048.2763.1494.stgit@paris.rdu.redhat.com> <20090922135612.GA17769@infradead.org> <1253640526.2747.7.camel@dhcp231-106.rdu.redhat.com> <20090922200635.GB28826@infradead.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner+glk-linux-kernel-3=40m.gmane.org-S1754632AbZIWIs0@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20090922200635.GB28826@infradead.org>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org

Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 01:28:46PM -0400, Eric Paris wrote:
> > > only using MAY_ACCESS for calles from access() insteaf of introducing
> > > a FROM_ACCESS flag and causing lots of naming confusion.
> > 
> > What would you think of a new, MUST_REVALIDATE_PERMS which will do what
> > MAY_ACCESS does today.  MAY_ACCESS would be just for access(2) and would
> > be the flag that I use for SELinux?
> 
> Yeah, something like this.  I don't like the MUST_REVALIDATE_PERMS name
> too much, but unless someone comes up with a better one I can live with
> it.

MAY_ACCESS is used in only these places:

    - access/faccessat
    - chdir/fchdir
    - chroot

And it is checked in only two easy to change places: nfs/dir.c and
fuse/dir.c.

Therefore how about MAY_CHDIR.

-- Jamie