On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 02:42:29PM +0200, David Sterba wrote: > On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 01:29:07PM -0400, [email protected] wrote: > > From: Josef Bacik <[email protected]> > > > > We need to use file->private_data for readdir on directories, so just > > don't allow user space transactions on directories. > > > > Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <[email protected]> > > --- > > fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 3 +++ > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c > > index bedeec6..ddb3811 100644 > > --- a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c > > +++ b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c > > @@ -3968,6 +3968,9 @@ static long btrfs_ioctl_trans_start(struct file *file) > > struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans; > > int ret; > > > > + if (S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode)) > > + return -EINVAL; > > You can't do this, starting a transaction on a directory needs to work. > The most natural way to run the ioctl is on the mount point. > > The file private data would need to be able to hold multipe values, so > you can add > > struct btrfs_inode { > ... > struct priv_data { > void *for_readdir; > void *for_tranc_ioctl; > }; > ... > }; > > then set file->file_private = &btrfs_inode->priv_data; and update all > uses to check for the embedded pointers.
So this cannot be attached to the inode but to struct file itself, otherwise this won't work for parallel readdir obviously. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
