linux-kernel - Re: devpts multiple instances feedback

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: <20090201163150.GB3416@lst.de>
Date:	Sun, 1 Feb 2009 17:31:50 +0100
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
	Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: devpts multiple instances feedback

On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 01:58:58PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> >>
> >>That was also one of the reasons for the default 000 mode on the pts/ptmx
> >>device node
> >
> >So just make it 000 but always created it.
> >
> 
> That's what we do...

Only if the kernel is compiled with CONFIG_DEVPTS_MULTIPLE_INSTANCES
(which will be clearly superflous after the cleanup patches because
the amount of addition code is minimal) _and_ you mount with
-o newinstance, and then you have another -o ptmxmode=foo option
to make it useable.

Really, even if we're really cautious there should be no compiletime
and just a single mount time option, but I'm not even sure that is
needed with the default zero mode.

--
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/