linux-kernel - Re: epoll_ctl and const correctness

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: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0903250921230.15216@makko.or.mcafeemobile.com>
Date:	Wed, 25 Mar 2009 09:23:21 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>
To:	nicolas sitbon <nicolas.sitbon@...il.com>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: epoll_ctl and const correctness

On Wed, 25 Mar 2009, nicolas sitbon wrote:

> Currently, the prototype of epoll_ctl is :
> 
> int epoll_ctl(int epfd, int op, int fd, struct epoll_event *event);
> 
> I searched in the man of epoll_ctl and google, and it seems that the
> structure pointed to by event isn't modify, valgrind confirms this
> behaviour, so am I wrong? or the good prototype is
> 
> int epoll_ctl(int epfd, int op, int fd, struct epoll_event const *event);

According to the current ctl operations, yes. But doing that would prevent 
other non-const operations to be added later on.


- 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/