On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 02:42:29PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 01:29:07PM -0400, josef@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > From: Josef Bacik <jbacik@xxxxxx>
> >
> > We need to use file->private_data for readdir on directories, so just
> > don't allow user space transactions on directories.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@xxxxxx>
> > ---
> > fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 3 +++
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c
> > index bedeec6..ddb3811 100644
> > --- a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c
> > +++ b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c
> > @@ -3968,6 +3968,9 @@ static long btrfs_ioctl_trans_start(struct file *file)
> > struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans;
> > int ret;
> >
> > + if (S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode))
> > + return -EINVAL;
>
> You can't do this, starting a transaction on a directory needs to work.
> The most natural way to run the ioctl is on the mount point.
>
> The file private data would need to be able to hold multipe values, so
> you can add
>
> struct btrfs_inode {
> ...
> struct priv_data {
> void *for_readdir;
> void *for_tranc_ioctl;
> };
> ...
> };
>
> then set file->file_private = &btrfs_inode->priv_data; and update all
> uses to check for the embedded pointers.
>
Blah I really want to just jetison the user space transaction stuff altogether
so I was hoping this would be a first step. But yeah we can do it your way too.
Thanks,
Josef
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
