linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] fallocate.2: add FALLOC_FL_PUNCH

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:	Tue, 20 Sep 2011 23:25:40 -0600
From:	Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca>
To:	mtk.manpages@...il.com
Cc:	Josef Bacik <josef@...hat.com>, Eric Gouriou <egouriou@...gle.com>,
	inux-man@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Lucian Adrian Grijincu <lucian.grijincu@...il.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Dave Chinner <dchinner@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fallocate.2: add FALLOC_FL_PUNCH_HOLE flag definition

On 2011-09-20, at 10:11 PM, Michael Kerrisk wrote:
> Thanks for this patch. As noted in another mail, Lucian also sent a
> patch for FALLOC_FL_PUNCH_HOLE, and I applied his patch first, and
> then added some pieces from yours, as well as some of my own edits.
> 
> However, the addition of a second class of operation to the man page
> made it clear that some significant restructuring of the page is
> required. So I substantially reworked the page, including the
> preexisting material on the default "file allocation" operation (Dave
> C please note).
> 
> ..TP
> .B EINVAL
> .I offset
> was less than 0, or
> .I len
> was less than or equal to 0.

I wasn't sure if this is a bug in the manpage or actually how it is done
in the kernel, but it seems this is a kernel implementation issue...

Does it make sense to return an error if len == 0?  That just adds extra
complexity on the part of the application, and doesn't reduce complexity
in the kernel (whether the kernel checks for len == 0 and returns 0 or
-EINVAL is not any different).  read() and write() and malloc() all allow
a length of zero to succeed, since applications may compute this length
and sometimes it is zero.

Cheers, Andreas





--
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/