From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay3.corp.sgi.com [198.149.34.15]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DC547F37 for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 12:48:14 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by relay3.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 348ABAC002 for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 10:48:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id LFkYD2oCeW71xBQg for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 10:48:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 14:48:05 -0300 From: Carlos Maiolino Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: fix sgid inheritance for subdirectories inheriting default acls [V2] Message-ID: <20130621174804.GA2843@andromeda.usersys.redhat.com> References: <1371569536-5779-1-git-send-email-cmaiolino@redhat.com> <20130618224351.GB29338@dastard> <20130619132921.GA5200@andromeda.usersys.redhat.com> <20130619233951.GL29338@dastard> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130619233951.GL29338@dastard> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Dave Chinner Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com Thanks for the Review Dave, Patch V3 sent to ML cheers > On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 10:29:22AM -0300, Carlos Maiolino wrote: > > Hi Dave, > > > > > > @@ -594,9 +594,10 @@ xfs_setattr_nonsize( > > > > * The set-user-ID and set-group-ID bits of a file will be > > > > * cleared upon successful return from chown() > > > > */ > > > > - if ((ip->i_d.di_mode & (S_ISUID|S_ISGID)) && > > > > - !capable(CAP_FSETID)) > > > > - ip->i_d.di_mode &= ~(S_ISUID|S_ISGID); > > > > + if (!S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode)) > > > > + if ((ip->i_d.di_mode & (S_ISUID|S_ISGID)) && > > > > + !capable(CAP_FSETID)) > > > > + ip->i_d.di_mode &= ~(S_ISUID|S_ISGID); > > > > > > I'm not sure I understand why this is part of this patch - the ACL > > > path does not enter this code branch (ATTR_UID/GID) so it doesn't > > > affect ACL inheritence. So this is some other behavioural change? > > > > > My apologies to have not commented it. > > > > During my code surfing to understand the problem, and what places we revoked > > sgid, I found this one, and, based on chmod specifications, we should keep sgid > > on the directory while chmoding it, unless the user explicitly ask for sgid > > removal, otherwise, if chmoding a file, we remove sgid if this isn't specified > > in the new mode. So, I've added a check here to ensure the inode isn't a dir > > before remove the sgid bit. > -- Carlos _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs