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):