Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2009 20:28:38 +0000
From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@mit.edu>, miklos@szeredi.hu,
       akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] vfs: new O_NODE open flag
Message-ID: <20091205202838.3456b6fc@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
In-Reply-To: <E1NH0Ub-0007oy-43@pomaz-ex.szeredi.hu>
References: <E1NFrsv-0000mE-2L@pomaz-ex.szeredi.hu>
	<20091202191549.1dbffa2e@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
	<E1NFva6-0001AI-0J@pomaz-ex.szeredi.hu>
	<20091202204828.4fa0c108@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
	<E1NG4WJ-00026r-GE@pomaz-ex.szeredi.hu>
	<4B1A7159.3070101@mit.edu>
	<E1NH0Ub-0007oy-43@pomaz-ex.szeredi.hu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 670
Lines: 14

> Maybe alan was worried about the O_NODE | O_RDWR, etc. case?  That
> simply doesn't make any sense for special files.

I am concerned primarily about the lack of ability to get rid of such a
handle in a controlled fashion. The udev/device unload case is simply one
obvious way to exploit it.

I still don't believe O_NODE makes sense without revoke(), and even then
needs huge amounts of care on the device side of things.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/