Re: [PATCH 24/32] vfs: syscall: Add fsopen() to prepare for superblock creation [ver #9]

[Al Viro]

On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 06:05:49PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Yeah, Andy is right that we should *not* make "write()" have side effects.
> 
> Use it to queue things by all means, but not "do" things. Not unless
> there's a very sane security model.
> 
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 4:59 PM Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > I think the right solution is one of:
> >
> > (a) Pass a netlink-formatted blob to fsopen() and do the whole thing in one syscall. I donât mean using netlink sockets â just the nlattr format.  Or you could use a different format. The part that matters is using just one syscall to do the whole thing.
> 
> Please no. Not another nasty marshalling thing.
> 
> > (b) Keep the current structure but use a new syscall instead of write().
> >
> > (c) Keep using write() but literally just buffer the data. Then have a new syscall to commit it.  In other words, replace âxâ with a syscall and call all the fs_context_operations helpers in that context instead of from write().
> 
> But yeah, b-or-c sounds fine.

Umm...  How about "use credentials of opener for everything"?