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.4.64.0706081246360.5795@alien.or.mcafeemobile.com>
Date:	Fri, 8 Jun 2007 12:51:05 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>
To:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
cc:	Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>, Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>,
	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>,
	Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@....com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [patch 7/8] fdmap v2 - implement sys_socket2

On Fri, 8 Jun 2007, Alan Cox wrote:

> > So, what do you plan to do? Those handle won't be zero-based. Your 
> > "working" system I immagine will do:
> > 
> > 	bleeh[handle - BASE].duh = ...;
> > 
> > How nice for a working system. If you *store* the handle returned by the 
> > OS, and you *use* the handle to call for OS services, you will be fine 
> > independently from the value handed out by the OS.
> 
> Well there are two ways I'd do this
> 
> #1: Throw the whole thing away and accept its not a good idea anyway

Unfortunately (exactly because of the same guarantees you're asking for 
those handles), in order for userspace libraries to reliably internally 
use fds to interact with the kernel, you need another kind of allocation 
strategy.



> #2: If I was really going this way and I wanted to use it for serious
> tricks for high performance I/O then I'd provide the handle from
> userspace so that the strategy for allocation is controlled by the caller
> who is the only one who can make the smart decisions

It does not work. What if the main application, library A and library B 
wants to implement their own allocation strategy?



- 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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ