| 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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 16 May 2016 15:08:08 +0200 From: Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@...a86.com> To: Felipe Balbi <felipe.balbi@...ux.intel.com>, Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu> Cc: "Du\, Changbin" <changbin.du@...el.com>, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, "gregkh\@linuxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, "rui.silva\@linaro.org" <rui.silva@...aro.org>, "k.opasiak\@samsung.com" <k.opasiak@...sung.com>, "lars\@metafoo.de" <lars@...afoo.de>, "linux-usb\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: gadget: f_fs: report error if excess data received > Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu> writes: >> The point is that you don't know whether the host sent more data than >> expected. All you know is that the host sent more data than the user >> asked the kernel for -- but maybe the user didn't ask for all the >> data that he expected. Maybe the user wanted to retrieve the full >> set of data using two read() system calls. On Mon, May 16 2016, Felipe Balbi wrote: > right, but that just means we need to buffer the data instead of bailing > out of the first read() completely. Correct. I have a ~4h bus ride ahead of me so I’ll try to implement it. If you don’t hear from me by the end of the day, there probably wasn’t enough space/comfort in the bus to use a laptop. -- Best regards ミハウ “𝓶𝓲𝓷𝓪86” ナザレヴイツ «If at first you don’t succeed, give up skydiving»
Powered by blists - more mailing lists