linux-kernel - Re: [RFC c/r 2/4] [RFC] syscalls, x86: Add __NR

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: <20120127204707.GS11086@moon>
Date:	Sat, 28 Jan 2012 00:47:07 +0400
From:	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...nvz.org>
To:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	ebiederm@...ssion.com, xemul@...nvz.org, xemul@...allels.com,
	avagin@...nvz.org, kosaki.motohiro@...il.com, mingo@...e.hu,
	hpa@...or.com, tglx@...utronix.de, glommer@...allels.com,
	andi@...stfloor.org, tj@...nel.org, matthltc@...ibm.com,
	penberg@...nel.org, eric.dumazet@...il.com, segoon@...nwall.com,
	adobriyan@...il.com, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
Subject: Re: [RFC c/r 2/4] [RFC] syscalls, x86: Add __NR_kcmp syscall v7

On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 03:19:07PM -0500, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
...
> > +
> > +		if (filp1 && filp2)
> > +			ret = kcmp_ptr((long)filp1, (long)filp2, KCMP_FILE);
> > +		else
> > +			ret = -ENOENT;
> 
> If my remember is correct, Andrew pointed out EINVAL is better than ENOENT.
> 

Phphphp :) there a version posted already which
returns -EBADFD (as Eric pointed me).

> > +#ifdef CONFIG_SYSVIPC
> > +		ret = kcmp_ptr((long)task1->sysvsem.undo_list,
> > +			       (long)task2->sysvsem.undo_list,
> > +			       KCMP_SYSVSEM);
> > +#else
> > +		ret = -EINVAL;
> 
> ENOTSUP is better, I think. because of, EINVAL implicitly mean _caller_ is wrong.
> but in this case, it is not bad. only the kernel doesn't have enough feature.
> 

I see.

> 
> > +		goto err;
> 
> you don't need err label at all.
> 

yeah, thanks.

> > +
> > +                printf("pid1: %6d pid2: %6d FD: %2d FILES: %2d VM: %2d FS: %2d "
> > +		       "SIGHAND: %2d IO: %2d SYSVSEM: %2d INV: %2d\n",
> > +		       pid1, pid2,
> > +		       sys_kcmp(pid1, pid2, KCMP_FILE,		fd1, fd2),
> > +		       sys_kcmp(pid1, pid2, KCMP_FILES,		0, 0),
> > +		       sys_kcmp(pid1, pid2, KCMP_VM,		0, 0),
> > +		       sys_kcmp(pid1, pid2, KCMP_FS,		0, 0),
> > +		       sys_kcmp(pid1, pid2, KCMP_SIGHAND,	0, 0),
> > +		       sys_kcmp(pid1, pid2, KCMP_IO,		0, 0),
> > +		       sys_kcmp(pid1, pid2, KCMP_SYSVSEM,	0, 0),.
> 
> The best practice of auto test is
> 
>  AssertFooBar(expected_value, actual_value);
> 
> and, just only print "correct or not". Only you know the correct value.
> 

ok

	Cyrill
--
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/