linux-kernel - Re: [Patch] proc: check error pointer returned by m

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:	Mon, 28 Mar 2011 13:02:55 +0800
From:	Cong Wang <amwang@...hat.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	WANG Cong <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Eric B Munson <emunson@...bm.net>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
Subject: Re: [Patch] proc: check error pointer returned by m_start()

于 2011年03月28日 11:58, Linus Torvalds 写道:
> On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 8:46 PM, Amerigo Wang<amwang@...hat.com>  wrote:
>>
>> This is true, that commit changed the return value of m_start(),
>> which will return an error pointer on failure, but Al forgot
>> to check the error pointer in m_stop() which will be called
>> when m_start() fails. This patches fixes it.
>
> I did this slightly differently, and put the check in m_stop()
> instead, because I felt that matched the logic of m_start, while
> vma_stop() is more of an internal helper thing.
>

Ok, I am fine with this, will send an updated patch.

> I dunno. I don't think it matters. But one thing I reacted to was that
> when I was walking through the logic, I really wanted to say "seq_file
> is wrong to call m_stop if m_start returned an error code". I really
> felt like "hwy, if ->start fails, we damn well shouldn't have called
> ->stop".


This is a good point and makes prefect sense.

>
> But I guess we're stuck with that particular semantic for seq_files by now.
>

Yup, I guess there are some seq_file users still rely on this behavior,
we can fix them all later.

Thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/