linux-ext4 - Re: d_off field in struct dirent and 32-on-64 emulation

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 28 Dec 2018 12:56:33 +0100
From:   Florian Weimer <fw@...eb.enyo.de>
To:     Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval.zanella@...aro.org>
Cc:     linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        v9fs-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net, libc-alpha@...rceware.org,
        qemu-devel@...gnu.org, ericvh@...il.com, rminnich@...dia.gov,
        lucho@...kov.net, hpa@...or.com, arnd@...db.de
Subject: Re: d_off field in struct dirent and 32-on-64 emulation

* Adhemerval Zanella:

> On 27/12/2018 16:09, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Adhemerval Zanella:
>> 
>>> Also for glibc standpoint, although reverting it back to use getdents 
>>> syscall for non-LFS mode might fix this issue for architectures that
>>> provides non-LFS getdents syscall it won't be a fix for architectures 
>>> that still provides off_t different than off64_t *and* only provides 
>>> getdents64 syscall.
>>>
>>> Currently we only have nios2 and csky (unfortunately).  But since generic 
>>> definition for off_t and off64_t still assumes non-LFS support, all new
>>> 32-bits ports potentially might carry the issue.
>> 
>> For csky, we could still change the type of the non-standard d_off
>> field to long long int.  This way, only telldir would have to fail
>> when truncation is necessary, as mentioned below:
>
> I think it makes no sense to continue making non-LFS as default for
> newer 32 bits ports, the support will be emulated with LFS syscalls.

Sorry, I don't see how this matters.  seekdir and telldir are NOT
affected by LFS.