Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-ext4+bounces-1661-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223;
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2024 14:52:24 +0100
From: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
To: Max Kellermann <max.kellermann@ionos.com>
Cc: Michael Forney <mforney@mforney.org>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, 
	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>, Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com>, Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@gmail.com>, 
	Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>, Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@kernel.org>, 
	ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, 
	jfs-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net, Yang Xu <xuyang2018.jy@fujitsu.com>, 
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] fs/{posix_acl,ext2,jfs,ceph}: apply umask if ACL
 support is disabled
Message-ID: <20240315-hasst-anmachen-4c9e89a56840@brauner>
References: <CAKPOu+-hLrrpZShHh0o6uc_KMW91suEd0_V_uzp5vMf4NM-8yw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKPOu+_0yjg=PrwAR8jKok8WskjdDEJOBtu3uKR_4Qtp8b7H1Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <20231011135922.4bij3ittlg4ujkd7@quack3>
 <20231011-braumeister-anrufen-62127dc64de0@brauner>
 <20231011170042.GA267994@mit.edu>
 <20231011172606.mztqyvclq6hq2qa2@quack3>
 <20231012142918.GB255452@mit.edu>
 <20231012144246.h3mklfe52gwacrr6@quack3>
 <28DSITL9912E1.2LSZUVTGTO52Q@mforney.org>
 <CAKPOu+910gjDp9Lk3sW=CmTM8j_FHEYyfH-kQKz-piRJHkQiDw@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <CAKPOu+910gjDp9Lk3sW=CmTM8j_FHEYyfH-kQKz-piRJHkQiDw@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 02:08:04PM +0100, Max Kellermann wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 9:39 PM Michael Forney <mforney@mforney.org> wrote:
> > Turns out that symlinks are inheriting umask on my system (which
> > has CONFIG_EXT4_FS_POSIX_ACL=n):
> >
> > $ umask 022
> > $ ln -s target symlink
> > $ ls -l symlink
> > lrwxr-xr-x    1 michael  michael           6 Mar 13 13:28 symlink -> target
> > $
> >
> > Looking at the referenced functions, posix_acl_create() returns
> > early before applying umask for symlinks, but ext4_init_acl() now
> > applies the umask unconditionally.
> 
> Indeed, I forgot to exclude symlinks from this - sorry for the breakage.
> 
> > After reverting this commit, it works correctly. I am also unable
> > to reproduce the mentioned issue with O_TMPFILE after reverting the
> > commit. It seems that the bug was fixed properly in ac6800e279a2
> > ('fs: Add missing umask strip in vfs_tmpfile'), and all branches
> > that have this ext4_init_acl patch already had ac6800e279a2 backported.
> 
> I can post a patch that adds the missing check or a revert - what do
> the FS maintainers prefer?

If it works correctly with a revert we should remove the code rather
than adding more code to handle a special case.

> 
> (There was a bug with O_TMPFILE ignoring umasks years ago - I first
> posted the patch in 2018 or so - but by the time my patch actually got
> merged, the bug had already been fixed somewhere else IIRC.)

Yeah, we fixed it a while ago and then I added generic VFS level umask
handling but POSIX ACL are hurting us because they're a massive layering
violation on that front.