On Tuesday 14 March 2006 21:02, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> Sorry for garbled patch. I do not know why mutt decided to encode
> some "=" as =3D.
>
>
> Index: compat/linux/linux_misc.c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /usr/local/arch/ncvs/src/sys/compat/linux/linux_misc.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.172
> diff -u -r1.172 linux_misc.c
> --- compat/linux/linux_misc.c 28 Dec 2005 07:08:54 -0000 1.172
> +++ compat/linux/linux_misc.c 14 Mar 2006 11:45:57 -0000
> @@ -310,6 +310,21 @@
> * XXX: This should use vn_open() so that it is properly authorized,
> * and to reduce code redundancy all over the place here.
> */
> + if (vp->v_type == VLNK) {
> + error = EMLINK;
> + goto cleanup;
> + }
> + if (vp->v_type == VSOCK) {
> + error = EOPNOTSUPP;
> + goto cleanup;
> + }
> + if (vp->v_type == VFIFO) {
> + /* Due to way fifo works (by overloading f_ops),
> + * tricking kernel into write to the fifo leads to
> + * panic. Make a band-aid to filter the case. */
> + error = EOPNOTSUPP;
> + goto cleanup;
> + }
> #ifdef MAC
> error = mac_check_vnode_open(td->td_ucred, vp, FREAD);
> if (error)
> Index: fs/fifofs/fifo_vnops.c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /usr/local/arch/ncvs/src/sys/fs/fifofs/fifo_vnops.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.132
> diff -u -r1.132 fifo_vnops.c
> --- fs/fifofs/fifo_vnops.c 1 Oct 2005 20:15:41 -0000 1.132
> +++ fs/fifofs/fifo_vnops.c 14 Mar 2006 11:46:07 -0000
> @@ -168,6 +168,7 @@
> int a_mode;
> struct ucred *a_cred;
> struct thread *a_td;
> + int a_fdidx;
> } */ *ap;
> {
> struct vnode *vp = ap->a_vp;
> Index: kern/vfs_syscalls.c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /usr/local/arch/ncvs/src/sys/kern/vfs_syscalls.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.411
> diff -u -r1.411 vfs_syscalls.c
> --- kern/vfs_syscalls.c 4 Mar 2006 00:09:09 -0000 1.411
> +++ kern/vfs_syscalls.c 14 Mar 2006 11:46:10 -0000
> @@ -4101,6 +4101,13 @@
> error = EOPNOTSUPP;
> goto bad;
> }
> + if (vp->v_type == VFIFO) {
> + /* Due to way fifo works (by overloading f_ops),
> + * tricking kernel into write to the fifo leads to
> + * panic. Make a band-aid to filter the case. */
> + error = EOPNOTSUPP;
> + goto bad;
> + }
> mode = 0;
> if (fmode & (FWRITE | O_TRUNC)) {
> if (vp->v_type == VDIR) {
> Index: kern/vfs_vnops.c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /usr/local/arch/ncvs/src/sys/kern/vfs_vnops.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.238
> diff -u -r1.238 vfs_vnops.c
> --- kern/vfs_vnops.c 11 Mar 2006 17:14:05 -0000 1.238
> +++ kern/vfs_vnops.c 14 Mar 2006 11:46:10 -0000
> @@ -194,6 +194,13 @@
> error = EOPNOTSUPP;
> goto bad;
> }
> + if ((vp->v_type == VFIFO) && (fdidx < 0)) {
> + /* Due to way fifo works (by overloading f_ops),
> + * tricking kernel into write to the fifo leads to
> + * panic. Make a band-aid to filter the case. */
> + error = EOPNOTSUPP;
> + goto bad;
> + }
> mode = 0;
> if (fmode & (FWRITE | O_TRUNC)) {
> if (vp->v_type == VDIR) {
>
I know, someone will work out such a messy patch, but is it reasonable ?
why does not the fifi code suddenly work with well defined vnode interface ?
why did someone want to break the well defined FILE->vnode->fs->device
layers ? sigh.
David Xu
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
