linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] writev() semantics with invalid iovec in the middle

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: <CA+55aFzvnjzAiORshN6YMmjuixQgH2YdU0wWqfDP7p8fw8jETw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 15 Sep 2016 15:32:46 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:     Mike Marshall <hubcap@...ibond.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] writev() semantics with invalid iovec in the middle

On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 3:29 PM, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>
> Unfortunately, some of LTP writev tests end up checking that writev() does
> behave that way - they feed it a three-element iovec with shorter-than-page
> segments, the second of which is all invalid.  And they check that the
> entire first segment had been written.
>
> I would really like to drop that property,

I'm pretty sure you can and should do that.

The LTP test people have actually been pretty good about just fixing
their tests when they cause problems and there is no reason for the
particular behavior.

             Linus