lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Oct]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: splice vs O_APPEND
On Fri, Oct 10 2008, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Oct 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Thu, 9 Oct 2008, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > >
> > > The thing is, the append-only attribute is absolutely useless without
> > > being able to depend on it. So in that sense I think the IS_APPEND
> > > issue is important, and I'm fine with your original proposal for that
> > > (except we don't need the IS_IMMUTABLE check).
> >
> > Heh. In the meantime, I had grown to hate that more complex patch.
> >
> > So because I do see your point with IS_APPEND (being different from
> > O_APPEND), but because I also think that O_APPEND itself is a gray and
> > murky area, I just committed the following. I doubt anybody will ever even
> > notice it, but while I think it's all debatable, we might as well debate
> > it with this in place. I do agree that it's "safer" behaviour.
>
> Thanks.
>
> I suspect this qualifies for stable kernels too. Stable team, can you
> please add this to your queue?
>
> The final commit is:
>
> commit efc968d450e013049a662d22727cf132618dcb2f
> Author: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
> Date: Thu Oct 9 14:04:54 2008 -0700
>
> Don't allow splice() to files opened with O_APPEND
>
> This is debatable, but while we're debating it, let's disallow the
> combination of splice and an O_APPEND destination.
>
> It's not entirely clear what the semantics of O_APPEND should be, and
> POSIX apparently expects pwrite() to ignore O_APPEND, for example. So
> we could make up any semantics we want, including the old ones.
>
> But Miklos convinced me that we should at least give it some thought,
> and that accepting writes at arbitrary offsets is wrong at least for
> IS_APPEND() files (which always have O_APPEND set, even if the reverse
> isn't true: you can obviously have O_APPEND set on a regular file).
>
> So disallow O_APPEND entirely for now. I doubt anybody cares, and this
> way we have one less gray area to worry about.
>
> Reported-and-argued-for-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
> Acked-by: Jens Axboe <ens.axboe@oracle.com>

And lets then change this to <jens.axboe@oracle.com>

:-)


> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
>
> diff --git a/fs/splice.c b/fs/splice.c
> index 1bbc6f4..a1e701c 100644
> --- a/fs/splice.c
> +++ b/fs/splice.c
> @@ -898,6 +898,9 @@ static long do_splice_from(struct pipe_inode_info *pipe, struct file *out,
> if (unlikely(!(out->f_mode & FMODE_WRITE)))
> return -EBADF;
>
> + if (unlikely(out->f_flags & O_APPEND))
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> ret = rw_verify_area(WRITE, out, ppos, len);
> if (unlikely(ret < 0))
> return ret;

--
Jens Axboe



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-10-10 12:09    [W:0.095 / U:0.372 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site