linux-kernel - Re: f_owner.lock and file->pos updates

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]

Message-ID: <20070308004853.4f5a090c@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Date:	Thu, 8 Mar 2007 00:48:53 +0000
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	"Michael K. Edwards" <medwards.linux@...il.com>
Cc:	"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: f_owner.lock and file->pos updates

On Wed, 7 Mar 2007 11:17:36 -0800
"Michael K. Edwards" <medwards.linux@...il.com> wrote:

> Suppose I want to create an atomic llseek+writev operation.  Is this
> more or less sufficient:

The right way IMHO would be to do the work that was done for pread/pwrite
and implement preadv/pwritev. The moment you want to do atomic things
with the file->f_pos instead of doing it with a local passed pos value it
gets ugly.. why do you need to do it with f_pos ?

Alan
-
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/