| Message ID | 1357299935-9321-1-git-send-email-ycnian@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Fri, Jan 04, 2013 at 07:45:35PM +0800, ycnian@gmail.com wrote: > From: Yanchuan Nian <ycnian@gmail.com> > > The write function doesn't be implemented in file content, and it's meaningless > to write data into this file directly. Remove write permission from it. So does it really matter either way? OK, applying, but I wonder. --b. > > Signed-off-by: Yanchuan Nian <ycnian@gmail.com> > --- > net/sunrpc/cache.c | 2 +- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/net/sunrpc/cache.c b/net/sunrpc/cache.c > index 9afa439..9f84703 100644 > --- a/net/sunrpc/cache.c > +++ b/net/sunrpc/cache.c > @@ -1614,7 +1614,7 @@ static int create_cache_proc_entries(struct cache_detail *cd, struct net *net) > goto out_nomem; > } > if (cd->cache_show) { > - p = proc_create_data("content", S_IFREG|S_IRUSR|S_IWUSR, > + p = proc_create_data("content", S_IFREG|S_IRUSR, > cd->u.procfs.proc_ent, > &content_file_operations_procfs, cd); > cd->u.procfs.content_ent = p; > -- > 1.7.4.4 > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Sat, Jan 05, 2013 at 12:29:05PM +0800, Yanchuan Nian wrote: > 2013/1/5 J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org> > > > On Fri, Jan 04, 2013 at 07:45:35PM +0800, ycnian@gmail.com wrote: > > > From: Yanchuan Nian <ycnian@gmail.com> > > > > > > The write function doesn't be implemented in file content, and it's > > meaningless > > > to write data into this file directly. Remove write permission from it. > > > > So does it really matter either way? > > > No, it doesn't matter. I saw that nfs-utils communicates with nfsd through > proc fs, so I tried to update the cache by writing data to proc fs > directly. I found the format of "channel" and "flush" in nfs-utils, but I > couldn't find the format of "content", so I read the sunrpc source code, > and found that the write function doesn't be implemented, but the write > permission is set when registering into proc fs. I also found that > "content" in pipe fs doesn't have write permission. OK, so if it had been read-only it might have saved you a little confusion. Fair enough. --b. > > > > > OK, applying, but I wonder. > > > > --b. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Yanchuan Nian <ycnian@gmail.com> > > > --- > > > net/sunrpc/cache.c | 2 +- > > > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/net/sunrpc/cache.c b/net/sunrpc/cache.c > > > index 9afa439..9f84703 100644 > > > --- a/net/sunrpc/cache.c > > > +++ b/net/sunrpc/cache.c > > > @@ -1614,7 +1614,7 @@ static int create_cache_proc_entries(struct > > cache_detail *cd, struct net *net) > > > goto out_nomem; > > > } > > > if (cd->cache_show) { > > > - p = proc_create_data("content", S_IFREG|S_IRUSR|S_IWUSR, > > > + p = proc_create_data("content", S_IFREG|S_IRUSR, > > > cd->u.procfs.proc_ent, > > > &content_file_operations_procfs, cd); > > > cd->u.procfs.content_ent = p; > > > -- > > > 1.7.4.4 > > > > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/net/sunrpc/cache.c b/net/sunrpc/cache.c index 9afa439..9f84703 100644 --- a/net/sunrpc/cache.c +++ b/net/sunrpc/cache.c @@ -1614,7 +1614,7 @@ static int create_cache_proc_entries(struct cache_detail *cd, struct net *net) goto out_nomem; } if (cd->cache_show) { - p = proc_create_data("content", S_IFREG|S_IRUSR|S_IWUSR, + p = proc_create_data("content", S_IFREG|S_IRUSR, cd->u.procfs.proc_ent, &content_file_operations_procfs, cd); cd->u.procfs.content_ent = p;