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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 22:50:37 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> To: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com> CC: Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, cotte@...ibm.com, hugh@...itas.com, neilb@...e.de, zanussi@...ibm.com, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>, hch@...radead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] sendfile removal Jens Axboe wrote: >>> >> I would personally argue that sendfile() blocking on an O_NONBLOCK >> desriptor, as opposed to returning EAGAIN, is a bug, and a fairly >> serious such. > > I agree, but it's still a change in behaviour. Even if we consider the > app buggy (it is), can we potentially break it? > It depends on which app it is, of course. However, I think we have to smoke that out the hard way. I don't think we should retain a bug in the kernel just because some unknown app might depend on that bug -- taking that to the extreme we could never fix bugs at all... -hpa - 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists