On 2023-08-05, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 8/5/23 4:48?PM, Aleksa Sarai wrote: > > O_TMPFILE is actually __O_TMPFILE|O_DIRECTORY. This means that the old > > check for whether RESOLVE_CACHED can be used would incorrectly think > > that O_DIRECTORY could not be used with RESOLVE_CACHED. > > > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v5.12+ > > Fixes: 3a81fd02045c ("io_uring: enable LOOKUP_CACHED path resolution for filename lookups") > > Signed-off-by: Aleksa Sarai > > --- > > io_uring/openclose.c | 4 ++-- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/io_uring/openclose.c b/io_uring/openclose.c > > index 10ca57f5bd24..a029c230119f 100644 > > --- a/io_uring/openclose.c > > +++ b/io_uring/openclose.c > > @@ -35,9 +35,9 @@ static bool io_openat_force_async(struct io_open *open) > > { > > /* > > * Don't bother trying for O_TRUNC, O_CREAT, or O_TMPFILE open, > > - * it'll always -EAGAIN > > + * it'll always -EAGAIN. > > Please don't make this change, it just detracts from the actual change. > And if we are making changes in there, why not change O_TMPFILE as well > since this is what the change is about? Userspace can't pass just __O_TMPFILE, so to me "__O_TMPFILE open" sounds strange. The intention is to detect open(O_TMPFILE), it just so happens that the correct check is __O_TMPFILE. But I can change it if you prefer. -- Aleksa Sarai Senior Software Engineer (Containers) SUSE Linux GmbH