linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 11/13] xen/pvcalls: implement poll command

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: <2ee745f7-5bf4-b45c-bee9-e8aa4c20de92@oracle.com>
Date:   Fri, 22 Sep 2017 18:27:20 -0400
From:   Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>
To:     Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>,
        xen-devel@...ts.xen.org
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jgross@...e.com,
        Stefano Stabellini <stefano@...reto.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 11/13] xen/pvcalls: implement poll command


>  
> +static unsigned int pvcalls_front_poll_passive(struct file *file,
> +					       struct pvcalls_bedata *bedata,
> +					       struct sock_mapping *map,
> +					       poll_table *wait)
> +{
> +	int notify, req_id, ret;
> +	struct xen_pvcalls_request *req;
> +
> +	if (test_bit(PVCALLS_FLAG_ACCEPT_INFLIGHT,
> +		     (void *)&map->passive.flags)) {
> +		uint32_t req_id = READ_ONCE(map->passive.inflight_req_id);
> +
> +		if (req_id != PVCALLS_INVALID_ID &&
> +		    READ_ONCE(bedata->rsp[req_id].req_id) == req_id)
> +			return POLLIN | POLLRDNORM;


Do we need to clear PVCALLS_FLAG_ACCEPT_INFLIGHT? Or do we expect a
(subsequent?) accept() to do that?

-boris



> +
> +		poll_wait(file, &map->passive.inflight_accept_req, wait);
> +		return 0;
> +	}
> +