linux-kernel - Re: For the condition "file->f_mode", when it failed, it should return EACCES rather than EBADF.

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: <20130205132117.GU15092@kernel.dk>
Date:	Tue, 5 Feb 2013 14:21:17 +0100
From:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To:	majianpeng <majianpeng@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: For the condition "file->f_mode", when it failed, it should
 return EACCES rather than EBADF.

On Sun, Feb 03 2013, majianpeng wrote:
> Hi all,
> 	When I wanted to do discard operations,but i set the  openflag was O_RDONLY,it returned a EBADF rather than EACCES or EPERM.
> I searched the code and found:
> >case BLKDISCARD:
> >case BLKSECDISCARD: {
> >		uint64_t range[2];
> 
> >		if (!(mode & FMODE_WRITE))
> >			return -EBADF;
> Initial i thought there was error.But i searched all code of kernel and found some places like this.
> 
> The description of EBADF is "Bad file numbe". There are some places where returned EBADF like,
> >if (!f.file)
> >		return -EBADF;
> 
> So i think for checking file->f_mode when failed, it should return EACCESS.

But that would break the ABI at this point. I agree with you, though,
EBADF is not the right error for this case.

-- 
Jens Axboe

--
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/