linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 04/20] cachefiles: notify user daemon when withdrawing cookie

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <542f749c-b0f1-1de6-cb41-26e296afb2df@linux.alibaba.com>
Date:   Mon, 11 Apr 2022 20:48:49 +0800
From:   JeffleXu <jefflexu@...ux.alibaba.com>
To:     David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc:     linux-cachefs@...hat.com, xiang@...nel.org, chao@...nel.org,
        linux-erofs@...ts.ozlabs.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, willy@...radead.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, joseph.qi@...ux.alibaba.com,
        bo.liu@...ux.alibaba.com, tao.peng@...ux.alibaba.com,
        gerry@...ux.alibaba.com, eguan@...ux.alibaba.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, luodaowen.backend@...edance.com,
        tianzichen@...ishou.com, fannaihao@...du.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 04/20] cachefiles: notify user daemon when withdrawing
 cookie



On 4/11/22 8:35 PM, David Howells wrote:
> Jeffle Xu <jefflexu@...ux.alibaba.com> wrote:
> 
>> +static int init_close_req(struct cachefiles_req *req, void *private)
> 
> "cachefiles_" prefix please.

Okay.

> 
>> +	/*
>> +	 * It's possible if the cookie looking up phase failed before READ
>> +	 * request has ever been sent.
>> +	 */
> 
> What "it" is possible?  You might want to say "It's possible that the
> cookie..."

"It's possible that the following if (fd == 0) condition is triggered
when cookie looking up phase failed before READ request has ever been sent."

Anyway I will fix this comment then.

> 
>> +	if (fd == 0)
>> +		return -ENOENT;
> 
> 0 is a valid fd.

Yeah, but IMHO fd 0 is always for stdin? I think the allocated anon_fd
won't install at fd 0. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

In fact I wanna use "fd == 0" as the initial state as struct
cachefiles_object is allocated with kmem_cache_zalloc().


-- 
Thanks,
Jeffle