From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.111]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 565977F56 for ; Tue, 22 Apr 2014 10:54:38 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay1.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 120D28F8065 for ; Tue, 22 Apr 2014 08:54:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id ml2hGzL7cweEncca for ; Tue, 22 Apr 2014 08:54:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <535690A3.3080609@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 10:54:11 -0500 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: fix Q_XQUOTARM ioctl References: <535580A1.20806@redhat.com> <20140422064316.GA30375@infradead.org> In-Reply-To: <20140422064316.GA30375@infradead.org> 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: Christoph Hellwig Cc: xfs-oss On 4/22/14, 1:43 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 03:33:37PM -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. >> >> Split out the flag conversion from userspace to kernelspace, >> depending on the quotactl that is being executed; add 2 new >> helpers to do this, so that we send the right flags to the >> lower-level functions. >> >> This has been broken more or less forever, AFAICT. > > So if this isn't very urgent I'd rather replace ->set_xstate with one > operation per ioctl, so that we don't multiple different kinds of flags > over the same operation. > eh, that's probably better, I'll take a look. Thanks, -Eric _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs