Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <4B9D76D5-C794-4A49-A76F-3D4C10385EE0@kohlschutter.com>
 <CAJfpegs1Kta-HcikDGFt4=fa_LDttCeRmffKhUjWLr=DxzXg-A@mail.gmail.com>
 <83A29F9C-1A91-4753-953A-0C98E8A9832C@kohlschutter.com> <CAJfpegv5W0CycWCc2-kcn4=UVqk1hP7KrvBpzXHwW-Nmkjx8zA@mail.gmail.com>
 <FFA26FD1-60EF-457E-B914-E1978CCC7B57@kohlschutter.com> <CAJfpeguDAJpLMABsomBFQ=w6Li0=sBW0bFyALv4EJrAmR2BkpQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <A31096BA-C128-4D0B-B27D-C34560844ED0@kohlschutter.com>
In-Reply-To: <A31096BA-C128-4D0B-B27D-C34560844ED0@kohlschutter.com>
From:   Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Date:   Mon, 18 Jul 2022 15:13:28 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJfpegvBSCQwkCv=5LJDx1LRCN_ztTh9VMvrTbCyt0zf7W2trw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [REGRESSION] ovl: Handle ENOSYS when fileattr support is
 missing in lower/upper fs
To:     =?UTF-8?Q?Christian_Kohlsch=C3=BCtter?= 
        <christian@kohlschutter.com>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        overlayfs <linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 18 Jul 2022 at 15:03, Christian Kohlsch=C3=BCtter
<christian@kohlschutter.com> wrote:
>
> Am 18.07.2022 um 14:21 schrieb Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>:
> >
> > On Mon, 18 Jul 2022 at 12:56, Christian Kohlsch=C3=BCtter
> > <christian@kohlschutter.com> wrote:
> >
> >> However, users of fuse that have no business with overlayfs suddenly s=
ee their ioctl return ENOTTY instead of ENOSYS.
> >
> > And returning ENOTTY is the correct behavior.  See this comment in
> > <asm-generic/errrno.h>:
> >
> > /*
> > * This error code is special: arch syscall entry code will return
> > * -ENOSYS if users try to call a syscall that doesn't exist.  To keep
> > * failures of syscalls that really do exist distinguishable from
> > * failures due to attempts to use a nonexistent syscall, syscall
> > * implementations should refrain from returning -ENOSYS.
> > */
> > #define ENOSYS 38 /* Invalid system call number */
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Miklos
>
> That ship is sailed since ENOSYS was returned to user-space for the first=
 time.
>
> It reminds me a bit of Linus' "we do not break userspace" email from 2012=
 [1, 2], where Linus wrote:
> > Applications *do* care about error return values. There's no way in
> > hell you can willy-nilly just change them. And if you do change them,
> > and applications break, there is no way in hell you can then blame the
> > application.

Correct.  The question is whether any application would break in this
case.  I think not, but you are free to prove otherwise.

Thanks,
Miklos