linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Sort module list - use ppos instead of m->private

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]

Date:	Fri, 24 Aug 2007 16:34:48 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
Cc:	Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Martin Bligh <mbligh@...gle.com>,
	"Randy.Dunlap" <rdunlap@...otime.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Sort module list - use ppos instead of m->private

On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 11:39:33 -0400
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca> wrote:

> Sort modules list - use ppos instead of m->private
> 
> When reading the data by small chunks (i.e. byte by byte), the index (ppos) is
> incremented by seq_read() directly and no "next" callback is called when going
> to the next module.
> 
> Therefore, use ppos instead of m->private to deal with the fact that this index
> is incremented directly to pass to the next module in seq_read() after the
> buffer has been emptied.

Confused.  What problem is this patch fixing?  I'm guessing that something
is going wrong when /proc/modules is read one-byte-at-a-time?

<tests that>

<nope>

Better changelogs, please.

-
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/