From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:51907 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751280AbeEQXBv (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 May 2018 19:01:51 -0400 Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 01:01:50 +0200 From: Mark Fasheh To: Adam Borowski Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] vfs: allow dedupe of user owned read-only files Message-ID: <20180517230150.GA28045@wotan.suse.de> Reply-To: Mark Fasheh References: <20180511192651.21324-1-mfasheh@suse.de> <20180511192651.21324-2-mfasheh@suse.de> <20180512024920.i7duhoi3lnkha4yl@angband.pl> <20180513181653.GD27915@wotan.suse.de> <20180513205025.3kolgcnbpy4grqtv@angband.pl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20180513205025.3kolgcnbpy4grqtv@angband.pl> Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sun, May 13, 2018 at 10:50:25PM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: > On Sun, May 13, 2018 at 06:16:53PM +0000, Mark Fasheh wrote: > > On Sat, May 12, 2018 at 04:49:20AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: > > > On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 12:26:50PM -0700, Mark Fasheh wrote: > > > > The permission check in vfs_dedupe_file_range() is too coarse - We > > > > only allow dedupe of the destination file if the user is root, or > > > > they have the file open for write. > > > > > > > > This effectively limits a non-root user from deduping their own > > > > read-only files. As file data during a dedupe does not change, > > > > this is unexpected behavior and this has caused a number of issue > > > > reports. > [...] > > > > So change the check so we allow dedupe on the target if: > > > > > > > > - the root or admin is asking for it > > > > - the owner of the file is asking for the dedupe > > > > - the process has write access > > > > > > I submitted a similar patch in May 2016, yet it has never been applied > > > despite multiple pings, with no NAK. My version allowed dedupe if: > > > - the root or admin is asking for it > > > - the file has w permission (on the inode -- ie, could have been opened rw) > > > > Ahh, yes I see that now. I did wind up acking it too :) > > > > > > I like this new version better than mine: "root or owner or w" is more > > > Unixy than "could have been opened w". > > > > I agree, IMHO the behavior in this patch is intuitive. What we had before > > would surprise users. > > Actually, there's one reason to still consider "could have been opened w": > with it, deduplication programs can simply open the file r and not care > about ETXTBSY at all. Otherwise, every program needs to stat() and have > logic to pick the proper argument to the open() call (r if owner/root, > rw or w if not). That makes sense. The goal after all is to be able to just open r and not worry about it. I hadn't considered the other possibilities that inode_permission() covers. I'll make that change for my next series. Thanks, --Mark