On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 12:48 AM, Aruna Balakrishnaiah <[email protected]> wrote: > pstore_erase is used to erase the record from the persistent store. > So if a driver has not defined pstore_erase callback return > -EINVAL instead of unlinking a file as deleting the file without > erasing its record in persistent store will give a wrong impression > to customers.
This is probably true -- I originally liked the idea of being able to clean up the entries, regardless of their storage state, but you're probably right. They shouldn't be deleted unless they can _actually_ be deleted. So, I support this change, but I think the return needs to be different. EINVAL isn't listed, for example, in unlink(2)'s man-page. Perhaps EROFS, EACCESS, or EPERM? -Kees > > Signed-off-by: Aruna Balakrishnaiah <[email protected]> > --- > fs/pstore/inode.c | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/fs/pstore/inode.c b/fs/pstore/inode.c > index e4bcb2c..fa6339a 100644 > --- a/fs/pstore/inode.c > +++ b/fs/pstore/inode.c > @@ -178,6 +178,8 @@ static int pstore_unlink(struct inode *dir, struct dentry > *dentry) > if (p->psi->erase) > p->psi->erase(p->type, p->id, p->count, > dentry->d_inode->i_ctime, p->psi); > + else > + return -EINVAL; > > return simple_unlink(dir, dentry); > } > -- Kees Cook Chrome OS Security -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
