netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/2] avoid OPEN_MAX in SCM_MAX

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Tue, 13 Mar 2007 18:15:29 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>
cc:	Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@...ck.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] avoid OPEN_MAX in SCM_MAX_FD



On Tue, 13 Mar 2007, Roland McGrath wrote:
> 
> Ok, fine.  But PATH_MAX is a real constant that has some meaning in the
> kernel.  It's perfectly correct to use PATH_MAX as a constant on a system
> like Linux that defines it and means what it says.  Conversely, OPEN_MAX
> has no useful relationship with anything the kernel is doing at all.

Sure. I'm just saying that some people may use OPEN_MAX the way I know 
people use PATH_MAX - whether it's what you're supposed to or not.

I do agree that PATH_MAX is much more appropriate to be used that way, and 
is more likely to have "real" meaning, I just worry.

		Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html