[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87oa9fbsag.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org>
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2016 19:10:47 -0500
From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>, security@...ian.org,
"security\@kernel.org" <security@...nel.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
"security\@ubuntu.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
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists