Re: [PATCH] cifs: Add support for FSCTL passthrough that write data to the server

From: ronnie sahlberg <ronniesahlberg@gmail.com>
To: Pavel Shilovsky <piastryyy@gmail.com>
Cc: Ronnie Sahlberg <lsahlber@redhat.com>,
	linux-cifs <linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org>,
	Steve French <smfrench@gmail.com>,
	Stable <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cifs: Add support for FSCTL passthrough that write data to the server
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2019 06:00:45 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAN05THSfvHozfdZuDDZqKH-eS2EmvY2yz1Z6DmRhu6+t=X_GuA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKywueQOJd__BpyF_eki0_KbLvZFYRhtKRkaDo_oWwU6080OYg@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 3:49 AM Pavel Shilovsky <piastryyy@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> ср, 10 апр. 2019 г. в 19:21, Ronnie Sahlberg <lsahlber@redhat.com>:
> >
> > Add support to pass a blob to the server in FSCTL passthrough.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ronnie Sahlberg <lsahlber@redhat.com>
> > ---
> >  fs/cifs/smb2ops.c  | 17 +++++++++++++++--
> >  fs/cifs/smbfsctl.h | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  2 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/cifs/smb2ops.c b/fs/cifs/smb2ops.c
> > index 83a100dd2497..bb7522b882ea 100644
> > --- a/fs/cifs/smb2ops.c
> > +++ b/fs/cifs/smb2ops.c
> > @@ -1382,6 +1382,18 @@ smb2_ioctl_query_info(const unsigned int xid,
> >         oparms.fid = &fid;
> >         oparms.reconnect = false;
> >
> > +       /*
> > +        * FSCTL codes encode the special access they need in the fsctl code.
> > +        */
> > +       if (qi.flags & PASSTHRU_FSCTL) {
> > +               switch (qi.info_type & FSCTL_DEVICE_ACCESS_MASK) {
> > +               case FSCTL_DEVICE_ACCESS_FILE_READ_WRITE_ACCESS:
> > +                       oparms.desired_access = FILE_READ_DATA | FILE_WRITE_DATA | FILE_READ_ATTRIBUTES | SYNCHRONIZE;
> > +                       ;
>
> This extra ":" looks unnecessary. Don't we need to add cases for
> +#define FSCTL_DEVICE_ACCESS_FILE_ANY_ACCESS        (0x00 << 14)
> +#define FSCTL_DEVICE_ACCESS_FILE_READ_ACCESS       (0x01 << 14)
> +#define FSCTL_DEVICE_ACCESS_FILE_WRITE_ACCESS      (0x02 << 14)
> ?

Thanks, yeah that ';' should go.
We should add cases for the other three DEVICE_ACCESS cases but
i don't know yet how these are mapped on windows.
READ_WRITE was based on what win16 used as desired_access for this.

We can add the others later when we start adding other fsctl types
when we compare to what windows uses.

>
> --
> Best regards,
> Pavel Shilovsky