linux-kernel - Re: [patch 00/22] pollfs: filesystem abstraction for pollable objects

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: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0705021010390.7176@alien.or.mcafeemobile.com>
Date:	Wed, 2 May 2007 10:28:42 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
cc:	Davi Arnaut <davi@...ent.com.br>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 00/22] pollfs: filesystem abstraction for pollable objects

On Tue, 1 May 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:

> David, could you provide some feedback please?  The patches are stunningly
> free of comments, but you used to do that to me pretty often so my sympathy
> is limited ;)

You bastard! :)
Ok, from a brief look ...

[general]
The code adds an extra indirection over the already existing 
file_operations, that IMO already sufficently abstract a file.
The compat code, if I read it correctly, does not support files crossing 
32/64 bits boundaries (exec or SCM_RIGHTS).

[timers]
Returns a structure instead of a 32 bit counter (ala timerfd), and needs 
extra compat code.

[signal]
All the discussions that went on for signalfd has been lost. It pins the 
task struct and it does not handle process detach signaling.

[aio]
I prefer a signaling-only approach like the 20 lines patch I posted, and 
use the standard AIO calls to fetch results. This code simply wraps AIO 
calls. This is just my opinions of course, and others may disagree.

[futex]
I intentionally stayed out of there after all the talks about futexfd 
being killed due to the impossibility of getting an interface right (did 
not follow the talk, so I can't tell the level of BS contained in the 
previous statement). We also have a nice printk in there, with the first 
kill-on deadline that ever made mainline :)

         printk(KERN_WARNING "Process `%s' used FUTEX_FD, which "
                "will be removed from the kernel in June 2007\n",
                 current->comm);

- Davide

-
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/