From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Al Viro Subject: Re: [git pull] vfs.git part 2 Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 16:48:34 +0100 Message-ID: <20130712154833.GA4165@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20130703122918.GK4165@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20130712054817.GY4165@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <8738rk9eai.fsf@rasmusvillemoes.dk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org To: Rasmus Villemoes Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8738rk9eai.fsf@rasmusvillemoes.dk> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:02:45PM +0000, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: > But isn't the problem the case where dirname does not exist? I.e., the > application has to make sure that "/some/where" exists and is a directory > before open("/some/where", O_CREAT | O_TMPFILE | O_RDWR, 0666) can be > relied upon to fail on kernels not recognizing O_TMPFILE, instead of > just creating "where" in "/some". > > Just thinking out loud, and please tell me to shut up if it doesn't make > sense: The documentation for O_DIRECTORY seems to imply that one could > require O_DIRECTORY to be given when using O_TMPFILE. The "If pathname > is not a directory, cause the open to fail" certainly seems to make > sense when O_TMPFILE is used, and older kernels should complain when > seeing the O_CREAT|O_DIRECTORY combination. It is a hack, though. They should, but they won't ;-/ It's the same problem - we do *not* validate the flags argument. We'll get to do_last(), hit lookup_open(), which will create the sucker and go to finish_open_created. Which is past the logics checking for LOOKUP_DIRECTORY trying to return a non-directory and it would've been too late to fail anyway - the file has already been created. IOW, O_DIRECTORY is ignored when O_CREAT is present *and* file didn't exist already. In that case we almost certainly can treat that as a bug (i.e. start failing open() on O_CREAT | O_DIRECTORY in all cases - I'd be _very_ surprised if somebody called open() with such combination of flags), but that doesn't help with older kernels...