[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <61F170A6-5A56-4BF5-BFB5-FC62AB6F3612@zytor.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2016 18:06:48 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: ebiederm@...ssion.com,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>, security@...ian.org,
"security@...nel.org" <security@...nel.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
"security@...ntu.com >> security" <security@...ntu.com>,
Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>,
Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@...ntu.com>,
Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>,
Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@...el32.net>,
One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Jann Horn <jann@...jh.net>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.com>, Florian Weimer <fw@...eb.enyo.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/13] devpts: Teach /dev/ptmx to find the associated devpts via path lookup
On April 11, 2016 5:10:47 PM PDT, ebiederm@...ssion.com wrote:
>Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> writes:
>
>> On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Eric W. Biederman
>> <ebiederm@...ssion.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> My practical concern if we worked through the implementation details
>>> would be how would it interact with people who bind mount
>/dev/pts/ptmx
>>> on top of /dev/ptmx. We might get some strange new errors.
>>
>> Yes, please don't let's play "clever" games. The semantics should be
>> fairly straightforward.
>
>Actually for me this is about keeping the semantics simpler, and coming
>up with a higher performance implementation.
>
>A dentry that does an automount is already well defined.
>
>Making the rule that accessing /dev/ptmx causes an automount of
>/dev/pts/ptmx on top of the device node at /dev/ptmx is really simple,
>with no special games. It also makes it more obvious to userspace what
>is going on. AKA allows userspace to know which superblock does an
>open
>ptmx master tty belongs to (and it happens in a backwards and forwards
>compatible way).
>
>My only concern is with this very minor change in semantics will
>anything care. I need to implement and test to find out.
>
>I think I see an implementation that Al won't grumble too loudly about.
>
>Anyway I am going to try this and see what I can see.
>
>Eric
Why bother with an automount? You can look up ../ptmx from the devpts get_super method and just do the bind mount once. No fuss, no muss. What's wrong with that?
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse brevity and formatting.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists