| To: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] xfstests: test EROFS vs. EEXIST when creating on an RO filesystem |
| From: | Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 27 Nov 2012 16:12:58 -0600 |
| Cc: | xfs-oss <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <20121127221111.GA13753@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <50B52DB7.3030506@xxxxxxxxxx> <20121127221111.GA13753@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121026 Thunderbird/16.0.2 |
On 11/27/12 4:11 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 03:16:39PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> TBH, I don't know if this is posix-specified, but I found out the >> hard way that when trying to re-create existing files on a readonly >> filesystem, some apps expect/handle EEXIST, but fail on EROFS. >> >> This will test mkdir, mknod, and symlinks for that behavior. > > Just curious, which filesystem would fail this currently or did in the > past? No single filesystem, really - I temporarily broke the VFS in a rhel backport. ;) But it seems like the kind of thing that could be missed in the future, so figured it was worth a quick test. (basically this was from moving mnt_want_write outside i_mutex for freeze work, and returning an error directly from mnt_want_write() would give us EROFS instead of maybe EEXIST) -Eric |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] xfstests: test EROFS vs. EEXIST when creating on an RO filesystem, Christoph Hellwig |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH] xfstests: test EROFS vs. EEXIST when creating on an RO filesystem, Christoph Hellwig |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] xfstests: test EROFS vs. EEXIST when creating on an RO filesystem, Christoph Hellwig |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] xfstests: test EROFS vs. EEXIST when creating on an RO filesystem, Christoph Hellwig |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |