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 C17DB7F52 for ; Wed, 23 Apr 2014 10:27:11 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by relay3.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BC19AC001 for ; Wed, 23 Apr 2014 08:27:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.9]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id R6f4RFXDA0Zwx8cn (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 23 Apr 2014 08:27:10 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 08:27:08 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] xfs: fix Q_XQUOTARM ioctl Message-ID: <20140423152708.GA3326@infradead.org> References: <535580A1.20806@redhat.com> <5356B986.2060906@sandeen.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5356B986.2060906@sandeen.net> 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: Eric Sandeen Cc: Eric Sandeen , Jan Kara , xfs-oss On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 01:48:38PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > The Q_XQUOTARM quotactl was not working properly, because > we weren't passing around proper flags. The xfs_fs_set_xstate() > ioctl handler used the same flags for Q_XQUOTAON/OFF as > well as for Q_XQUOTARM, but Q_XQUOTAON/OFF look for > XFS_UQUOTA_ACCT, XFS_UQUOTA_ENFD, XFS_GQUOTA_ACCT etc, > i.e. quota type + state, while Q_XQUOTARM looks only for > the type of quota, i.e. XFS_DQ_USER, XFS_DQ_GROUP etc. > > Unfortunately these flag spaces overlap a bit, so we > got semi-random results for Q_XQUOTARM; i.e. the value > for XFS_DQ_USER == XFS_UQUOTA_ACCT, etc. yeargh. > > Add a new quotactl op vector specifically for the QUOTARM > operation, since it operates with a different flag space. > > This has been broken more or less forever, AFAICT. > > Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen Looks good for now: Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig If you have a spare cycle or two I think splitting quotaon and quotaoff might not be an all that bad idea either. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs