Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pidfd tree with the vfs tree
Hi all,
On Mon, 15 Feb 2021 07:55:14 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> On Mon, 25 Jan 2021 16:17:06 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the pidfd tree got a conflict in:
> >
> > fs/coredump.c
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> > 8a3cc755b138 ("coredump: don't bother with do_truncate()")
Now:
0016c9bb87a7 ("coredump: don't bother with do_truncate()")
> >
> > from the vfs tree and commit:
> >
> > 643fe55a0679 ("open: handle idmapped mounts in do_truncate()")
> >
> > from the pidfd tree.
> >
> > I fixed it up (the former removes dump_truncate(), so I did that) and
> > can carry the fix as necessary. This is now fixed as far as linux-next
> > is concerned, but any non trivial conflicts should be mentioned to your
> > upstream maintainer when your tree is submitted for merging. You may
> > also want to consider cooperating with the maintainer of the conflicting
> > tree to minimise any particularly complex conflicts.
>
> With the merge window about to open, this is a reminder that this
> conflict still exists.
This is now a conflict between the vfs tree and Linus' tree.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
pgpJBqb6Lp2sN.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pidfd tree with the vfs tree
Hi all,
On Mon, 15 Feb 2021 08:05:21 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> On Mon, 25 Jan 2021 17:00:54 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the pidfd tree got a conflict in:
> >
> > fs/namei.c
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> > e36cffed20a3 ("fs: make unlazy_walk() error handling consistent")
> > 1e8f44f159b3 ("do_tmpfile(): don't mess with finish_open()")
> >
> > from the vfs tree and commit:
> >
> > 47291baa8ddf ("namei: make permission helpers idmapped mount aware")
> > ba73d98745be ("namei: handle idmapped mounts in may_*() helpers")
> > 549c7297717c ("fs: make helpers idmap mount aware")
> >
> > from the pidfd tree.
> >
> > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> > is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> > conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> > is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
> > with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> > complex conflicts.
> >
> > diff --cc fs/namei.c
> > index 4cae88733a5c,dbf53b325ac9..
> > --- a/fs/namei.c
> > +++ b/fs/namei.c
> > @@@ -1568,14 -1639,18 +1644,16 @@@ static struct dentry *lookup_slow(cons
> > return res;
> > }
> >
> > - static inline int may_lookup(struct nameidata *nd)
> > + static inline int may_lookup(struct user_namespace *mnt_userns,
> > +struct nameidata *nd)
> > {
> > if (nd->flags & LOOKUP_RCU) {
> > - int err = inode_permission(nd->inode, MAY_EXEC|MAY_NOT_BLOCK);
> > + int err = inode_permission(mnt_userns, nd->inode,
> > + MAY_EXEC | MAY_NOT_BLOCK);
> > - if (err != -ECHILD)
> > + if (err != -ECHILD || !try_to_unlazy(nd))
> > return err;
> > - if (unlazy_walk(nd))
> > - return -ECHILD;
> > }
> > - return inode_permission(nd->inode, MAY_EXEC);
> > + return inode_permission(mnt_userns, nd->inode, MAY_EXEC);
> > }
> >
> > static int reserve_stack(struct nameidata *nd, struct path *link,
> > unsigned seq)
> > @@@ -3324,9 -3453,11 +3453,9 @@@ static int do_tmpfile(struct nameidata
> > path.dentry = child;
> > audit_inode(nd->name, child, 0);
> > /* Don't check for other permissions, the inode was just created */
> > - error = may_open(, 0, op->open_flag);
> > + error = may_open(mnt_userns, , 0, op->open_flag);
> > - if (error)
> > - goto out2;
> > - file->f_path.mnt = path.mnt;
> > - error = finish_open(file, child, NULL);
> > + if (!error)
> > + error = vfs_open(, file);
> > out2:
> > mnt_drop_write(path.mnt);
> > out:
>
> With the merge window about to open, this is a reminder that this
> conflict still exists.
>
> Those vfs tree commits have also been merged into the block tree.
This is now a conflict between the pidfd tree and Linus' tree.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
pgpbLYOLN6HmR.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pidfd tree with the vfs tree
Hi all,
On Mon, 25 Jan 2021 17:00:54 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the pidfd tree got a conflict in:
>
> fs/namei.c
>
> between commit:
>
> e36cffed20a3 ("fs: make unlazy_walk() error handling consistent")
> 1e8f44f159b3 ("do_tmpfile(): don't mess with finish_open()")
>
> from the vfs tree and commit:
>
> 47291baa8ddf ("namei: make permission helpers idmapped mount aware")
> ba73d98745be ("namei: handle idmapped mounts in may_*() helpers")
> 549c7297717c ("fs: make helpers idmap mount aware")
>
> from the pidfd tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> complex conflicts.
>
> diff --cc fs/namei.c
> index 4cae88733a5c,dbf53b325ac9..
> --- a/fs/namei.c
> +++ b/fs/namei.c
> @@@ -1568,14 -1639,18 +1644,16 @@@ static struct dentry *lookup_slow(cons
> return res;
> }
>
> - static inline int may_lookup(struct nameidata *nd)
> + static inline int may_lookup(struct user_namespace *mnt_userns,
> + struct nameidata *nd)
> {
> if (nd->flags & LOOKUP_RCU) {
> - int err = inode_permission(nd->inode, MAY_EXEC|MAY_NOT_BLOCK);
> + int err = inode_permission(mnt_userns, nd->inode,
> +MAY_EXEC | MAY_NOT_BLOCK);
> -if (err != -ECHILD)
> +if (err != -ECHILD || !try_to_unlazy(nd))
> return err;
> -if (unlazy_walk(nd))
> -return -ECHILD;
> }
> - return inode_permission(nd->inode, MAY_EXEC);
> + return inode_permission(mnt_userns, nd->inode, MAY_EXEC);
> }
>
> static int reserve_stack(struct nameidata *nd, struct path *link, unsigned
> seq)
> @@@ -3324,9 -3453,11 +3453,9 @@@ static int do_tmpfile(struct nameidata
> path.dentry = child;
> audit_inode(nd->name, child, 0);
> /* Don't check for other permissions, the inode was just created */
> - error = may_open(, 0, op->open_flag);
> + error = may_open(mnt_userns, , 0, op->open_flag);
> -if (error)
> -goto out2;
> -file->f_path.mnt = path.mnt;
> -error = finish_open(file, child, NULL);
> +if (!error)
> +error = vfs_open(, file);
> out2:
> mnt_drop_write(path.mnt);
> out:
With the merge window about to open, this is a reminder that this
conflict still exists.
Those vfs tree commits have also been merged into the block tree.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
pgpQSgOZQ88ID.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pidfd tree with the vfs tree
Hi all,
On Mon, 25 Jan 2021 16:17:06 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the pidfd tree got a conflict in:
>
> fs/coredump.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 8a3cc755b138 ("coredump: don't bother with do_truncate()")
>
> from the vfs tree and commit:
>
> 643fe55a0679 ("open: handle idmapped mounts in do_truncate()")
>
> from the pidfd tree.
>
> I fixed it up (the former removes dump_truncate(), so I did that) and
> can carry the fix as necessary. This is now fixed as far as linux-next
> is concerned, but any non trivial conflicts should be mentioned to your
> upstream maintainer when your tree is submitted for merging. You may
> also want to consider cooperating with the maintainer of the conflicting
> tree to minimise any particularly complex conflicts.
With the merge window about to open, this is a reminder that this
conflict still exists.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
pgpUZSsSzSq0f.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
