public inbox for linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@cyphar.com>,
	Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org,
	Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>,
	containers@lists.linux-foundation.org,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] openat2: reject RESOLVE_BENEATH|RESOLVE_IN_ROOT
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 16:28:26 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4ce6ba2c-8b23-78aa-47c0-8c9673273e8f@linuxfoundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201007103608.17349-1-cyphar@cyphar.com>

On 10/7/20 4:36 AM, Aleksa Sarai wrote:
> This was an oversight in the original implementation, as it makes no
> sense to specify both scoping flags to the same openat2(2) invocation
> (before this patch, the result of such an invocation was equivalent to
> RESOLVE_IN_ROOT being ignored).
> 
> This is a userspace-visible ABI change, but the only user of openat2(2)
> at the moment is LXC which doesn't specify both flags and so no
> userspace programs will break as a result.
> 
> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v5.6+
> Fixes: fddb5d430ad9 ("open: introduce openat2(2) syscall")
> Acked-by: Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>
> Signed-off-by: Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@cyphar.com>
> ---
>   fs/open.c                                      | 4 +++
>   tools/testing/selftests/openat2/openat2_test.c | 8 +++++++-

You are combining fs change with selftest change.

Is there a reason why these two changes are combined?
2 separate patches is better.

thanks,
-- Shuah

      parent reply	other threads:[~2020-10-27 22:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-10-07 10:36 [PATCH] openat2: reject RESOLVE_BENEATH|RESOLVE_IN_ROOT Aleksa Sarai
2020-10-09 11:50 ` Christian Brauner
2020-10-27 22:28 ` Shuah Khan [this message]

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=4ce6ba2c-8b23-78aa-47c0-8c9673273e8f@linuxfoundation.org \
    --to=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=christian.brauner@ubuntu.com \
    --cc=containers@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=cyphar@cyphar.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    --cc=stable@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox