linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] syslog: fill buffer with more than a single message for SYSLOG_ACTION

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:	Mon, 25 Jun 2012 08:05:17 +0100
From:	"Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@...e.com>
To:	"Kay Sievers" <kay@...y.org>
Cc:	<yuanhan.liu@...ux.intel.com>, <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] syslog: fill buffer with more than a single
 message for SYSLOG_ACTION_READ

>>> On 23.06.12 at 20:03, Kay Sievers <kay@...y.org> wrote:
>> Furthermore, this patch also addresses the problem dealt with in
>> commit 4a77a5a06ec66ed05199b301e7c25f42f979afdc ("printk: use mutex
>> lock to stop syslog_seq from going wild"), so I'd recommend reverting
>> that one too (albeit there's no direct collision between the two).
> 
> Are you sure that is covered? Doesn't the other thread would just
> return 0 to the caller then, instead of continuing to stay in the
> syscall when the first thread got the message?

The old code permitted returning zero in that case too, so I don't
see why the new code shouldn't be allowed to. But anyway, as
said this patch doesn't directly conflict, and hence it's up to the
maintainer(s) of the code to decide whether to keep it. The
conflicting one, however, imo ought to be reverted in any case.

Jan

--
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/