linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 0/6] epoll: Introduce new syscall "epoll_mod

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: <54BF3F69.702@gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 21 Jan 2015 06:55:53 +0100
From:	"Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@...il.com>
To:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>, Fam Zheng <famz@...hat.com>
CC:	mtk.manpages@...il.com,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
	Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
	David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@...il.com>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>,
	Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@...e.cz>,
	David Drysdale <drysdale@...gle.com>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
	Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>,
	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
	Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
	Rashika Kheria <rashika.kheria@...il.com>,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
	Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/6] epoll: Introduce new syscall "epoll_mod_wait"

On 01/20/2015 11:40 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:57 AM, Fam Zheng <famz@...hat.com> wrote:
>> This adds a new system call, epoll_mod_wait. It's described as below:

[...]

>>        There is no guartantee that all the commands are executed in order. Only
>>        if all the commands are successfully executed (all the error fields are
>>        set to 0), events are polled.
> 
> If this doesn't happen, what error is returned?

If I read the code correctly: the error of the first epoll_ctl op that fails.

[...]

>> RETURN VALUE
>>
>>        When any error occurs, epoll_mod_wait() returns -1 and errno is set
>>        appropriately. All the "error" fields in cmds are unchanged before they
>>        are executed, and if any cmds are executed, the "error" fields are set
>>        to a return code accordingly. See also epoll_ctl for more details of the
>>        return code.
> 
> Does this mean that callers should initialize the error fields to an
> impossible value first so they can tell which commands were executed?

Yes. (Ugly!)

[...]

>> ERRORS
>>
>>        These errors apply on either the return value of epoll_mod_wait or error
>>        status for each command, respectively.
> 
> Please clarify which errors are returned overall and which are per-command.

Yes, I think this would be valuable as well.

Thanks,

Michael

-- 
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
--
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/