| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <m38x8pr7ck.fsf@neuro-laptop.skynet> Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2007 23:37:15 +0200 From: Anton Arapov <aarapov@...hat.com> To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: SysV IPC: shmctl/msgctl/semctl returns EIDRM instead of EINVAL Please, fellas, take a look on my post! Thanks in advance. Anton Arapov <aarapov@...hat.com> writes: > Hi! > > SysV code returns EIDRM for collision of IDs. I sure it should return EINVAL. > > Steps to reproduce: (this for shared memory code, for msg/sem it is the same) > 1. Create then drop 2 shmem segments, then create a third. > 2. Try to shmctl(IPC_STAT) the two now-invalid shm IDs. > 3. Note error codes returned. > > One call gives EINVAL, one gives EIDRM due to collision with the third shmem segment. > Should both give EINVAL, this is what I've got on every other Unix I've tried it on. > > IPC code is good, EIDRM is justification of EINVAL. But neither SVr4 nor SVID documents EIDRM. > Single Unix Specification mentions EINVAL but not EIDRM as a possible failure for shmctl(), so the current kernel behavior is not merely self-inconsistent but a flat violation of the spec. > > Can somebody explain why do we have EIDRM? > > Anton. > SUS: http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007908799/xsh/shmctl.html - 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