| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <E1NG4WJ-00026r-GE@pomaz-ex.szeredi.hu> Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2009 06:46:27 +0100 From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu> To: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> CC: miklos@...redi.hu, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] vfs: new O_NODE open flag On Wed, 2 Dec 2009, Alan Cox wrote: > > You're still missing the point. O_NODE is like a hard link, except > > the reference doesn't come from the filesystem but from a file > > descriptor. From udev's perspective there's no difference. > > I don't think I am missing the point here. You have a reference to an > object in the fs but you don't have a reference to the driver underneath > s the driver can change on you *while* you have the O_NODE open and fd > live. That cannot happen with a hard link and open. > > It isn't the same thing as far as I can see. You don't have the barrier > between the operations that occurs in the real open/close case because > they lock the driver. The file descriptor opened with O_NODE allows exaclactly the same operations that a hard link to the device would, nothing more. It's just a link to the *node*, except it doesn't increment the link count, the driver is irrelevant. Miklos -- 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