From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CA9AC433E6 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2021 09:21:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC5C82076D for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2021 09:21:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235199AbhA0JVc (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Jan 2021 04:21:32 -0500 Received: from youngberry.canonical.com ([91.189.89.112]:55274 "EHLO youngberry.canonical.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235165AbhA0JSn (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Jan 2021 04:18:43 -0500 Received: from ip5f5af0a0.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de ([95.90.240.160] helo=wittgenstein) by youngberry.canonical.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1l4gxS-0003dS-Hj; Wed, 27 Jan 2021 09:17:50 +0000 Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2021 10:17:48 +0100 From: Christian Brauner To: "Darrick J. Wong" Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Christian Brauner , David Chinner , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Next Mailing List Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pidfd tree with the xfs tree Message-ID: <20210127091748.p75yt7sflqjypbxp@wittgenstein> References: <20210125171414.41ed957a@canb.auug.org.au> <20210127112441.1d07c1d4@canb.auug.org.au> <20210127031115.GA7695@magnolia> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210127031115.GA7695@magnolia> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 07:11:15PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 11:24:41AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > On Mon, 25 Jan 2021 17:14:14 +1100 Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the pidfd tree got a conflict in: > > > > > > fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c > > > > > > between commit: > > > > > > 01ea173e103e ("xfs: fix up non-directory creation in SGID directories") > > > > > > from the xfs tree and commit: > > > > > > f736d93d76d3 ("xfs: support idmapped mounts") > > > > > > from the pidfd tree. > > > > > > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This > > > is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial > > > conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree > > > is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating > > > with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly > > > complex conflicts. > > > > > > diff --cc fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c > > > index e2a1db4cee43,95b7f2ba4e06..000000000000 > > > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c > > > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c > > > @@@ -809,13 -810,13 +810,13 @@@ xfs_init_new_inode > > > inode->i_rdev = rdev; > > > ip->i_d.di_projid = prid; > > > > > > - if (pip && XFS_INHERIT_GID(pip)) { > > > - inode->i_gid = VFS_I(pip)->i_gid; > > > - if ((VFS_I(pip)->i_mode & S_ISGID) && S_ISDIR(mode)) > > > - inode->i_mode |= S_ISGID; > > > + if (dir && !(dir->i_mode & S_ISGID) && > > > + (mp->m_flags & XFS_MOUNT_GRPID)) { > > > + inode->i_uid = current_fsuid(); > > > > Looking a bit harder, I replaced the above line with > > inode->i_uid = fsuid_into_mnt(mnt_userns); > > I think that looks good, though Mr. Brauner is probably better equipped > to tell if that change is correct. This is on top of the setgid fixup. Yes, this looks good! :) I think what I'll do is to simply build -next for every release up until the merge window and run the xfstests I added on the kernel. That should reveal regressions very quickly. > > (He says watching kernel.org mail take nearly a day to come through...) Yeah, it had crazy delays (> 1 day). I chased down a few missing mails from yesterday. Jon took that opportunity to make vger behave a little better I believe, so delivery should be faster today, hopefully. Christian