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: <20201103190253.GA24382@lst.de>
Date:   Tue, 3 Nov 2020 20:02:53 +0100
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: support splice reads on seq_file based procfs files

On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 10:57:10AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 10:48 AM Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> wrote:
> >
> > ping?
> 
> It looked fine by me, although honestly, I'd prefer that last patch to
> be the minimum possible if we want this for 5.10.
> 
> Yeah, that might technically be just cpuinfo, but I'd be ok with the
> other read-only core proc files (ie I would *not* add it to anything
> that has a .proc_write operation like the ones in proc_net.c).
> 
> IOW, I'd start with just cpuinfo_proc_ops, proc_seq_ops,
> proc_single_ops, and stat_proc_ops.

I think Greg reported another test case hitting /proc/version

> 
> Because honestly, I'd rather restrict splice() as much as possible
> than try to say "everything should be able to do splice".

sure.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ