linux-kernel - SuSE O_DIRECT|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]

Date:	Wed, 12 Mar 2014 04:00:15 -0700
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>
Cc:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
	Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-man@...r.kernel.org
Subject: SuSE O_DIRECT|O_NONBLOCK overload

The SLES12 tree has various patches to implement special
O_DIRECT|O_NONBLOCK semantics for block devices:

	https://gitorious.org/opensuse/kernel-source/source/806eab3e4b02e798c1ae942440051f81c822ca35:patches.suse/block-nonblock-causes-failfast

this seems genuinely useful and I'd be really happy if people would do
this work upstream for two reasons:

 a) implementing different semantics only in a vendor kernel is a
    nightmare.  No proper way to document it in the man pages for
    example, and silent breakage of applications that expect it to be
    present, or even more nasty not present.
 b) Which brings us to: we had various issues with adding O_NONBLOCK to
    files that didn't support it before.  How well was this whole feature
    tested?

--
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/