On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 03:24:14AM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007, Satyam Sharma wrote:
> > [...]
> > Anwyay, so I'm thinking of adding:
> >
> > struct inode;
> >
> > int is_not_owner(struct inode *)
>
> ^static inline ^inode
>
> of course.
> > {
> > return ((current->fsuid != inode->i_uid) && !capable(CAP_FOWNER));
> > }
This is pointless. If you do not have definition of struct inode
already available, you'll get breakage on access to ->i_uid.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] utime(s): Honour CAP_FOWNER when times==NULL
- From: Satyam Sharma <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] utime(s): Honour CAP_FOWNER when times==NULL
- References:
- [PATCH] utime(s): Honour CAP_FOWNER when times==NULL
- From: Satyam Sharma <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] utime(s): Honour CAP_FOWNER when times==NULL
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] utime(s): Honour CAP_FOWNER when times==NULL
- From: Satyam Sharma <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] utime(s): Honour CAP_FOWNER when times==NULL
- From: Al Viro <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] utime(s): Honour CAP_FOWNER when times==NULL
- From: Satyam Sharma <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] utime(s): Honour CAP_FOWNER when times==NULL
- From: Satyam Sharma <[email protected]>
- [PATCH] utime(s): Honour CAP_FOWNER when times==NULL
- Prev by Date: Re: [patch] revert: [NET]: Fix races in net_rx_action vs netpoll
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 2.6.22.1] libata: Adjust libata to ignore errors after spinup
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] utime(s): Honour CAP_FOWNER when times==NULL
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] utime(s): Honour CAP_FOWNER when times==NULL
- Index(es):
 |