linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH perf/core v2 1/8] perf: Rewrite strbuf not to die

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]

Date:	Thu, 5 May 2016 20:49:12 -0300
From:	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
To:	Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH perf/core v2 1/8] perf: Rewrite strbuf not to die

Em Thu, May 05, 2016 at 08:25:38PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> Em Sat, Apr 30, 2016 at 12:09:50AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu escreveu:
> > @@ -112,12 +151,14 @@ ssize_t strbuf_read(struct strbuf *sb, int fd, ssize_t hint)
> >  				strbuf_release(sb);
> >  			else
> >  				strbuf_setlen(sb, oldlen);
> > -			return -1;
> > +			return cnt;
> 
> This is unrelated, no?
> 
> I.e. this _was_ already returning a failure code, but then you are
> propagating the read() return, which may even be a good idea, haven't
> thought about that, but is unrelated to what this patch is doing, please
> put it in a separate patch if you think it is a good idea.
> 
> All the rest seems ok, going over the other patches now.

Just a bit annoying, but this is done when checking if cnt < 0, which
can only be -1 as per read's man page, so its ok, nevermind...

- Arnaldo