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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 11:20:45 -0800 (PST) From: Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org> To: Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...glemail.com> cc: lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: Passing epoll file descriptors across Unix domain sockets On Fri, 29 Feb 2008, Michael Kerrisk wrote: > Hi Davide, > > After all of the recent discussions about epoll, I've been reviewing > other parts of the epoll.7 man page. In that page there is the > following: > > Q5 Can I send the epoll file descriptor over a Unix > domain socket to another process? > > A5 No. > > This does not seem accurate. I can understand that it makes no sense > to pass a an epoll file descriptor over a Unix domain socket, because > the receiving process does not have the file descriptors that are in > the epoll set. > > However, it is indeed possible (no errors result) to pass an epoll fd > over a Unix doman socket using SCM_RIGHTS. (I have just now tested > this.) > > Can you clarify? I suspect the text should really read: > > Q5 Can I send an epoll file descriptor over a Unix > domain socket to another process? > > A5 Yes, but it does not make sense to do this, since the > receiving process would not have copies of the file > descriptors in the epoll set. > > Does that seem okay? Looks okay to me. - 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