linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] Add polling support to pidfd

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:   Fri, 19 Apr 2019 15:05:38 -0400
From:   Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Daniel Colascione <dancol@...gle.com>,
        Jonathan Kowalski <bl0pbl33p@...il.com>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
        Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
        Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Andrei Vagin <avagin@...il.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Nadav Amit <namit@...are.com>, Serge Hallyn <serge@...lyn.com>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Taehee Yoo <ap420073@...il.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Android Kernel Team <kernel-team@...roid.com>,
        Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ho.ws>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] Add polling support to pidfd

On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 12:14:58PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 11:58 AM Daniel Colascione <dancol@...gle.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 11:44 AM Jonathan Kowalski <bl0pbl33p@...il.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Would using something other than POLLIN be an option (maybe POLLPRI)?
> > > The convention is to use it to indicate readability on the descriptor,
> > > and also possibly POLLHUP instead of POLLERR (the latter is less of a
> > > problem, but FreeBSD also does the same, so it'd help with some
> > > consistency for libraries wanting to use this, which aren't interested
> > > in other sub states).
> >
> > Existing event loop libraries generally support checking only for
> > readability and writability. Not setting POLLIN would make these FDs
> > more difficult to use with existing event loop libraries. What
> > advantage would compensate for this difficulty?
> 
> Right.
> 
> Usually you'd set POLLIN in _addition_ to any other more specialized poll flag.
> 
> For example, when a socket has shut down the read side, we do
> 
>         if (sk->sk_shutdown & RCV_SHUTDOWN)
>                 mask |= EPOLLRDHUP | EPOLLIN | EPOLLRDNORM;
> 
> because while it's true that EPOLLRDHUP is the most _specific_ poll
> bit, it's _also_ true that a read shutdown means that the read() will
> return immediately.
> 
> So generally a HUP condition should mean that POLLIN and POLLOUT also
> get set. Not because there's any actual _data_ to be read, but simply
> because the read will not block.

Sounds great and I agree with Linus and Daniel. So I am guessing you are Ok
with the current set of flags proposed this patch, so I will keep them intact
in future patch postings. But please let me know if you want me to change
something about the flags.

thanks!

 - Joel