linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] tty: add TIOCVHANGUP: time for revoke() in f

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]

Date:	Wed, 23 Feb 2011 00:30:33 +0000
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	Lennart Poettering <mzxreary@...inter.de>
Cc:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tty: add TIOCVHANGUP: time for revoke() in f_ops ?

> vhangup() is different from revoke(). vhangup() does weird SIGHUP
> handling and stuff, which I think goes way beyond what revoke() would
> eventually do. And that different behaviour becomes visible in various

Revoke() will also do this because you remove the controlling process
from the tty. What happens then is mandated by SuS/POSIX.

> > Its not a quick patch - that's why its not happened yet, vhangup(fd)
> > quickfix Lennart style is unfortunately a useless bodge job which like
> > most bodge jobs is simply going to spring leaks and need fixing again.
> 
> Thanks. If you are trying to insult me, doesn't really work,

Not intended as an insult. Believe me I wish a fix like that was viable,
but it's not - which is why its not been in the tree for years.

Alan
--
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/