linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] open(2): document O

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: <20120503141156.GP6871@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date:	Thu, 3 May 2012 15:11:56 +0100
From:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:	"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	mtk.manpages@...il.com, Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>,
	linux-man@...r.kernel.org, Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] open(2): document O_PATH

On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 07:34:35PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:

> I looked at dnotify_flush, they remove markers on an inode.
> But then it also checks for filp to match. So I am not sure
> whether skipping dnotify_flush for O_PATH descriptor have any impact. We
> can't use O_PATH descriptor for dnotify fcntl any way. So in
> dnotify_flush we will not match the filp.
> 
> Viro,
> 
> Any reason why we skip dnotify_flush  ?

See your last sentence above - why bother finding the mark, scanning the
list, etc. when we know that there won't be any matches?
--
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/