This patch causes an error to be returned if the caller attempts to open a
sysfs file in append mode.
This patch applies cleanly to 2.6.11-rc1.
Signed-off-by: Mitch Williams <[email protected]>
diff -urpN -X dontdiff linux-2.6.11-clean/fs/sysfs/file.c linux-2.6.11/fs/sysfs/file.c
--- linux-2.6.11-clean/fs/sysfs/file.c 2004-12-24 13:33:50.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.11/fs/sysfs/file.c 2005-01-24 16:26:21.000000000 -0800
@@ -275,6 +275,11 @@ static int check_perm(struct inode * ino
if (!ops)
goto Eaccess;
+ /* Is the file is open for append? Sorry, we don't do that. */
+ if (file->f_flags & O_APPEND) {
+ goto Einval;
+ }
+
/* File needs write support.
* The inode's perms must say it's ok,
* and we must have a store method.
On Tue, 2005-01-25 at 16:38, Mitch Williams wrote:
> This patch causes an error to be returned if the caller attempts to open a
> sysfs file in append mode.
>
> This patch applies cleanly to 2.6.11-rc1.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mitch Williams <[email protected]>
>
> diff -urpN -X dontdiff linux-2.6.11-clean/fs/sysfs/file.c linux-2.6.11/fs/sysfs/file.c
> --- linux-2.6.11-clean/fs/sysfs/file.c 2004-12-24 13:33:50.000000000 -0800
> +++ linux-2.6.11/fs/sysfs/file.c 2005-01-24 16:26:21.000000000 -0800
> @@ -275,6 +275,11 @@ static int check_perm(struct inode * ino
> if (!ops)
> goto Eaccess;
>
> + /* Is the file is open for append? Sorry, we don't do that. */
> + if (file->f_flags & O_APPEND) {
> + goto Einval;
> + }
> +
Could you drop the braces? Coding style thing.
thx,
josh
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005, Josh Boyer wrote:
>
> Could you drop the braces? Coding style thing.
>
Yeah, I'll drop and resubmit. I've got so many different things going on
with these patches, I'm getting confused. I know Greg asked for this same
change a while back but it got lost.
Resubmittal will commence in a few minutes.
-Mitch