linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] fs: Make splice() and tee() take into account O

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: <CAHk-=wh0ikMcREn-RLh-7TEeL28wj1-bHNTRsqpW_7dPuO7cAA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 4 Mar 2019 16:09:22 -0800
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:     Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Slavomir Kaslev <kaslevs@...are.com>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] fs: Make splice() and tee() take into account
 O_NONBLOCK flag on pipes

On Mon, Mar 4, 2019 at 4:04 PM Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> Of course, if it turns out that this breaks something that assumes
> that splice blocks purely based on the SPLICE_F_NONBLOCK flag, we'll
> have to revert it. Looking at the history of splice, it does look like
> it has always ignored O_NONBLOCK.

Note that the "arguably buggy" argument is not an actual real argument
in the presence of regressions. It's more a "I wish reality wasn't
that way" argument, but it doesn't actually _change_ reality.

Of course, in the case of sendfile() (which is where that comment is),
I don't think we ever really even tested it either way.

                 Linus