linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] [8/18] BKL-removal: Remove BKL from remote

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: <200801280538.25345.ak@suse.de>
Date:	Mon, 28 Jan 2008 05:38:25 +0100
From:	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
To:	Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com>
Cc:	Steve French <smfrench@...il.com>, swhiteho@...hat.com,
	sfrench@...ba.org, vandrove@...cvut.cz,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	akpm@...l.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [8/18] BKL-removal: Remove BKL from remote_llseek

On Monday 28 January 2008 05:13:09 Trond Myklebust wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 2008-01-28 at 03:58 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > The problem is that it's not a race in who gets to do its thing first, but a 
> > parallel reader can actually see a corrupted value from the two independent 
> > words on 32bit (e.g. during a 4GB). And this could actually completely corrupt 
> > f_pos when it happens with two racing relative seeks or read/write()s
> > 
> > I would consider that a bug.
> 
> I disagree. The corruption occurs because this isn't a situation that is
> allowed by either POSIX or SUSv2/v3. Exactly what spec are you referring
> to here?

No specific spec, just general quality of implementation. We normally don't have
non thread safe system calls even if it was in theory allowed by some specification.

-Andi
--
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/