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: <CAJfpegvBSCQwkCv=5LJDx1LRCN_ztTh9VMvrTbCyt0zf7W2trw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 18 Jul 2022 15:13:28 +0200
From:   Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To:     Christian Kohlschütter 
        <christian@...lschutter.com>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        overlayfs <linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [REGRESSION] ovl: Handle ENOSYS when fileattr support is
 missing in lower/upper fs

On Mon, 18 Jul 2022 at 15:03, Christian Kohlschütter
<christian@...lschutter.com> wrote:
>
> Am 18.07.2022 um 14:21 schrieb Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>:
> >
> > On Mon, 18 Jul 2022 at 12:56, Christian Kohlschütter
> > <christian@...lschutter.com> wrote:
> >
> >> However, users of fuse that have no business with overlayfs suddenly see their ioctl return ENOTTY instead of ENOSYS.
> >
> > And returning ENOTTY is the correct behavior.  See this comment in
> > <asm-generic/errrno.h>:
> >
> > /*
> > * This error code is special: arch syscall entry code will return
> > * -ENOSYS if users try to call a syscall that doesn't exist.  To keep
> > * failures of syscalls that really do exist distinguishable from
> > * failures due to attempts to use a nonexistent syscall, syscall
> > * implementations should refrain from returning -ENOSYS.
> > */
> > #define ENOSYS 38 /* Invalid system call number */
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Miklos
>
> That ship is sailed since ENOSYS was returned to user-space for the first time.
>
> It reminds me a bit of Linus' "we do not break userspace" email from 2012 [1, 2], where Linus wrote:
> > Applications *do* care about error return values. There's no way in
> > hell you can willy-nilly just change them. And if you do change them,
> > and applications break, there is no way in hell you can then blame the
> > application.

Correct.  The question is whether any application would break in this
case.  I think not, but you are free to prove otherwise.

Thanks,
Miklos

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ