linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] sendfile removal

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: <465FB3AD.5030807@zytor.com>
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/