Re: [PATCH 3/5] landlock_add_rule.2: Document missing reason for EINVAL

["Mickaël Salaün" <mic@digikod.net>]

On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 03:55:52PM +0000, Günther Noack wrote:
> This documents a missing reason for why EINVAL might be returned.
> The documented behavior exists since the first version of Landlock.
> 
> Cc: Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net>
> Signed-off-by: Günther Noack <gnoack@google.com>

Reviewed-by: Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net>

> ---
>  man/man2/landlock_add_rule.2 | 10 ++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/man/man2/landlock_add_rule.2 b/man/man2/landlock_add_rule.2
> index fa0b1f109..530b45947 100644
> --- a/man/man2/landlock_add_rule.2
> +++ b/man/man2/landlock_add_rule.2
> @@ -101,6 +101,16 @@ The rule accesses are inconsistent (i.e.,
>  .I rule_attr\->allowed_access
>  is not a subset of the ruleset handled accesses).
>  .TP
> +.B EINVAL
> +In
> +.IR "struct landlock_path_beneath_attr" ,
> +the rule accesses are not applicable to the file
> +(i.e., some access rights in
> +.I rule_attr\->allowed_access
> +are only applicable to directories, but
> +.I rule_attr\->parent_fd
> +does not refer to a directory).
> +.TP
>  .B ENOMSG
>  Empty accesses (i.e.,
>  .I rule_attr\->allowed_access
> -- 
> 2.45.2.993.g49e7a77208-goog
>