[systemd-devel] [PATCH] tmpfiles: only change device permissions if mknod succeeded

[Tom Gundersen]

On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 4:53 PM, Tom Gundersen <teg at jklm.no> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 4:48 PM, Lennart Poettering
> <mzerqung at 0pointer.de> wrote:
>> On Sat, 25.10.14 01:36, Tom Gundersen (teg at jklm.no) wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 9:32 PM, Lennart Poettering
>>> <lennart at poettering.net> wrote:
>>> > On Tue, 14.10.14 16:19, Jan Synacek (jsynacek at redhat.com) wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1147248
>>> >
>>> > Hmm, so far tmpfiles always adjust access modes, for all types of
>>> > lines, if that's possible. I think this makes sense. The bug
>>> > referenced above seems to suggest though that the access mode of the
>>> > /dev/fuse file node is specified differently in two places
>>> > though. This sounds like something to fix first?
>>>
>>> Well, the /run/tmpfiles.d/kmod.conf one is what the kernel exposes,
>>> and then the udev rules overrides this. We could surely fix this case,
>>> but in general I think we should expect that these may differ.
>>>
>>> To me it seems that we should not create devices nodes at all, except
>>> in systemd-tmpfiles-setup-dev.service, the reason being that udev
>>> rules are only applied to static nodes at udev startup, so any device
>>> nodes created (or changed) after that may end up with the wrong
>>> permissions (as seen here).
>>
>> Hmm, so does this mean that the kmod tmpfiles converter really should
>> suffixits lines with the exclamation mark? That way, only invocation
>> of tmpfiles with --boot would honour those files, which are the ones
>> we start at boot.
>>
>> Does that make sense?
>
>
> Yes, indeed, this is precisely what we want. I had missed that
> feature. I'll do a patch.


And done: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.modules/1402>.

Jan, does this look like it solves the original problem?

Cheers,

Tom