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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Mon, 20 Oct 2014 15:41:41 +0200
From:	Martin Kepplinger <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] lguest: force file->private_data to be NULL on open()

Am 2014-10-19 02:31, schrieb Martin Kepplinger:
> if we depend on private_data being NULL in write() before initialize()
> make sure it is NULL after open().
> Signed-off-by: Martin Kepplinger <>
> ---
> I'm not completely sure if this patch is needed and am still investigating.
> What do you think? open() could be called by the user I guess. Does
> lguest_user.c depend on private_data being NULL on a first write()?

Could it be that this patch is not needed indeed or did I ask not clear
enough here and caused a misunderstanding:

> Martin Kepplinger <> writes:
>> hi
>> Just a question for understanding: open() is not implemented in
>> lguest_user.c's miscdevice. The miscdevice core, in this case, does
>> _not_ set file->private_data on a user's open() call. Is open() called
>> by the user here? and do you here _depend_ on file->private_data being
>> NULL after open()? (could you even?)
>> Would the following force to NULL be necessary if the miscdevice core
>> _would_ set private_data?
> Hi Martin!
>         Yes, the private_data is NULL on a new file.  See
> get_empty_filp in fs/file_table.c, which does kmem_cache_zalloc
> (zeroing all the contents).
> So this isn't necessary here.
> Thanks!
> Rusty.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists