| 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, 27 Mar 2009 10:44:23 +0100 From: nicolas sitbon <nicolas.sitbon@...il.com> To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: epoll_ctl and const correctness Please, can anyone answer me, I need a response. 2009/3/25 nicolas sitbon <nicolas.sitbon@...il.com>: > You don't teach me anything, I know that, the fact is the > documentation is incomplete, so rather saying that, please answer my > questions. For the moment, only the documenation and the prototype of > epoll are buggy. > > 2009/3/25 Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>: >> nicolas sitbon wrote: >>> >>> valgrind confirms this >>> behaviour, so am I wrong? >> >> That doesn't prove very much. Unlike usermode code, Valgrind doesn't >> instrument the kernel, so it computes the side-effects of kernel operations >> by parsing the syscall stream and simulating the effect. (That is to say, >> it strengthens your argument somewhat, but valgrind's handling of this >> syscall could be buggy.) >> >>> or the good prototype is >>> >>> int epoll_ctl(int epfd, int op, int fd, struct epoll_event const *event); >>> >> >> Putting "const" first is conventional. >> >> J >> > -- 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