linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] procfs: expose umask in stat and status

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:	Sat, 5 May 2012 06:19:46 +0200
From:	Pierre Carrier <pierre@...tify.com>
To:	Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] procfs: expose umask in stat and status

On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 5:15 AM, Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com> wrote:
> How is it useful to display numeric -ENOENT in a /proc file?

The fields in stat are looked up by index, so they should all always appear.
Sticking to a numerical value makes both this code and parsing
reasonably straightforward.

Given expected values are masks, a negative value makes a good marker.
Overall I don't see a compelling reason to avoid an errno.
They seem common in kernel outputs and benefit from some tooling
(self-promotion: [1]).

Would you have a better idea in mind?

> So sometimes "Umask:" is displayed, sometimes not...

Well, it is displayed whenever available (which sounds better to my ear).
This seemed consistent with the current practices: status already has
guards for FDSize, Groups, VmPeak, VmSize, VmLck, VmPin, VmHWM, VmRSS,
VmData, VmStk, VmExe, VmLib, VmPTE, VmSwap.

In all honesty I can't think of a realistic situation where one would
look for a umask in a task that doesn't have one.

-- 
Pierre

[1] https://github.com/pcarrier/stuff/blob/master/sys/errnos.c
--
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/