Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 28 Jan 2014 20:27:54 +0000 | From | Al Viro <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] afs: proc cells and rootcell are writeable |
| |
On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 08:20:12PM +0000, David Howells wrote: > Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > > > > - p = proc_create("cells", 0, proc_afs, &afs_proc_cells_fops); > > > + p = proc_create("cells", S_IFREG | S_IRUGO | S_IWUSR, proc_afs, &afs_proc_cells_fops); > > > - p = proc_create("rootcell", 0, proc_afs, &afs_proc_rootcell_fops); > > > + p = proc_create("rootcell", S_IFREG | S_IRUGO | S_IWUSR, proc_afs, &afs_proc_rootcell_fops); > > > > So the S_IFREG isn't necessary. > > True. Is it worth creating proc_create_special() that can create a non-regular > file and then making proc_create() only permit regular files (and complain if > the S_IFMT field is not zero)?
We already do: in proc_create_data() we have struct proc_dir_entry *pde; if ((mode & S_IFMT) == 0) mode |= S_IFREG;
if (!S_ISREG(mode)) { WARN_ON(1); /* use proc_mkdir() */ return NULL; }
proc_mkdir{,_data,_mode} are there for purpose. Nobody had been insane enough to put FIFOs or sockets in procfs and anything else would need additional data anyway. proc_symlink() is there, proc_mknod() isn't and nobody has complained yet. Let's keep it that way, plese...
| |