From: Sage Weil <sage@newdream.net>
To: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] Btrfs commit fixes, async subvol operations
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2010 12:41:46 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1010251239080.7660@cobra.newdream.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101025192932.GG18818@think>
On Mon, 25 Oct 2010, Chris Mason wrote:
> These all look good to me and I'm pulling them in.
Great, thanks!
> > The last item is a change to SNAP_DESTROY to allow deletion of a
> > snapshot when the user owns the subvol's root inode and the parent
> > directory permissions are such that we would have allowed an rmdir(2).
> > Goffredo Baroncelli posted a similar patch that replicates the rmdir(2)
> > semantics completely (except for the empty directory check) by
> > duplicating some VFS code. Whether we want weaker semantics, duplicated
> > code, or some new EXPORT_SYMBOLS is up to you I think. Note that this
> > is distinct from a similar patch (also from Goffredo) that allows
> > rmdir(2) to remove an empty subvol; my goal is to allow a non-empty
> > subvol to be deleted by a non-root user. As long as I can do that, my
> > daemon doesn't have to run as root and I'm a happy camper. :)
>
> Someone at the storage workshop mentioned that this subvol deletion
> trick is slightly stronger than rm -rf, to make it include the same
> level of permission checks would require testing all the directories in
> the tree for permissions.
I think that was me :)
> For now, could you please make a mount -o user_subvol_rm_allowed option?
> (or something similar with a better name).
Sure.
Do you have a preference as far as what checks are implemented? My patch
implemented a simplified approximation of may_rmdir(); Goffredo's
duplicated the vfs checks. I guess I'm leaning toward the latter...
Thanks!
sage
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-10-25 19:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-10-25 19:07 [PATCH 0/6] Btrfs commit fixes, async subvol operations Sage Weil
2010-10-25 19:07 ` [PATCH 1/6] Btrfs: fix deadlock in btrfs_commit_transaction Sage Weil
2010-10-25 19:07 ` [PATCH 2/6] Btrfs: async transaction commit Sage Weil
2010-10-25 19:07 ` [PATCH 3/6] Btrfs: add START_SYNC, WAIT_SYNC ioctls Sage Weil
2010-10-25 19:07 ` [PATCH 4/6] Btrfs: add SNAP_CREATE_ASYNC ioctl Sage Weil
2010-10-25 19:07 ` [PATCH 5/6] Btrfs: make SNAP_DESTROY async Sage Weil
2010-10-25 19:07 ` [PATCH 6/6] Btrfs: allow subvol deletion by owner Sage Weil
2010-10-26 6:46 ` [PATCH 1/6] Btrfs: fix deadlock in btrfs_commit_transaction liubo
2010-10-26 16:36 ` Sage Weil
2010-10-26 17:06 ` Chris Mason
2010-10-27 0:41 ` liubo
2010-10-25 19:29 ` [PATCH 0/6] Btrfs commit fixes, async subvol operations Chris Mason
2010-10-25 19:41 ` Sage Weil [this message]
2010-10-25 19:58 ` Chris Mason
2010-10-25 21:27 ` Sage Weil
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.64.1010251239080.7660@cobra.newdream.net \
--to=sage@newdream.net \
--cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).