Messages in this thread |  | | | From | (Alan Cox) | | Subject | Re: Socket locking | | Date | Sat, 4 Oct 1997 19:58:58 +0100 (BST) |
| |
> I think this is a good idea. Really dentry->d_inode is "backing store > object" so just changing that member of struct dentry to be > "void *d_object" would suffice.
I think this is a really bad idea. Inode operations apply to a socket.
> But here is the other issue, don't we use the permission stuff in the > inode for socket processing in certain cases? And furthermore someone
You can validly chown/fchown sockets. Unix domain sockets can have real inodes. You an also stat sockets etc..
Alan
|  |