linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm: msync: require either MS_ASYNC or MS

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: <20140402104517.GA20656@rei>
Date:	Wed, 2 Apr 2014 12:45:17 +0200
From:	chrubis@...e.cz
To:	"Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@...il.com>
Cc:	Richard Hansen <rhansen@....com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
	Greg Troxel <gdt@...bbn.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: msync: require either MS_ASYNC or MS_SYNC

Hi!
> > and there's no good
> > reason to believe that this behavior would have persisted
> > indefinitely.
> > 
> > The msync(2) man page (as currently written in man-pages.git) is
> > silent on the behavior if both flags are unset, so this change should
> > not break an application written by somone who carefully reads the
> > Linux man pages or the POSIX spec.
> 
> Sadly, people do not always carefully read man pages, so there
> remains the chance that a change like this will break applications.
> Aside from standards conformance, what do you see as the benefit
> of the change?

I've looked around Linux Test Project and this change will break a few
testcases, but nothing that couldn't be easily fixed.

The rest of the world may be more problematic though.

-- 
Cyril Hrubis
chrubis@...e.cz
--
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/