linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RESEND] floppy: fix open(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: <nycvar.YFH.7.76.2101191649190.5622@cbobk.fhfr.pm>
Date:   Tue, 19 Jan 2021 16:53:29 +0100 (CET)
From:   Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>
To:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        Wim Osterholt <wim@....tudelft.nl>,
        Denis Efremov <efremov@...ux.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND] floppy: fix open(O_ACCMODE) for ioctl-only open

On Mon, 25 Jul 2016, Jens Axboe wrote:

> > From: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
> >
> > Commit 09954bad4 ("floppy: refactor open() flags handling"), as a
> > side-effect, causes open(/dev/fdX, O_ACCMODE) to fail. It turns out that
> > this is being used setfdprm userspace for ioctl-only open().
> >
> > Reintroduce back the original behavior wrt !(FMODE_READ|FMODE_WRITE)
> > modes, while still keeping the original O_NDELAY bug fixed.
> >
> > Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org # v4.5+
> > Reported-by: Wim Osterholt <wim@....tudelft.nl>
> > Tested-by: Wim Osterholt <wim@....tudelft.nl>
> > Signed-off-by: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
> 
> Added for this series, thanks.

[ CCing Denis too ]

Let me revive this 4 years old thread.

I've just now noticed that instead of my patch above being merged, what 
happened instead was

	commit f2791e7eadf437633f30faa51b30878cf15650be
	Author: Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>
	Date:   Thu Aug 25 08:56:51 2016 -0600

	    Revert "floppy: refactor open() flags handling"
    
	    This reverts commit 09954bad448791ef01202351d437abdd9497a804.


which was plain revert of 09954bad4 (without any further explanation), 
which in turn reintroduced the O_NDELAY issue, and I've just been hit by 
it again.

I am not able to find any e-mail thread that'd indicate why ultimately 
revert happened, instead of mergin my fix.
Jens, do you have any idea?

Thanks,

-- 
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs