netdev - Re: [PATCH 4/8] net/socket: sys_accept4

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: <CAHo-Ooxqc75Z7ptiUjFKcFdO2Si3S6_pw28QcyFVzn_js1dfkA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 9 Mar 2015 15:50:24 -0700
From:	Maciej Żenczykowski <zenczykowski@...il.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
	Linux NetDev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/8] net/socket: sys_accept4 - reverse allocation order

> Unfortunately this changes accept() behavior when/if ENFILE/EMFILE is
> reported.
>
> Some applications might depend on this behavior to eventually start a
> garbage collection of a cache using file descriptors to regular files.
>
> After your patch, a failed accept() call would silently 'consume' a
> session in the listener queue.

We could in the case of the first failure, attempt to grab a file
descriptor anyway, and if that fails return that failure instead, and
if it succeeds, release it and still return the first failure.

Would that be ok?

> Also, this patch series should be CCed to lkml and Al Viro, as it is a
> mix of fs & network changes.

Ok.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html