netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 1/4] net: socket: add support for async operations

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: <550B0AB4.2060507@intel.com>
Date:	Thu, 19 Mar 2015 10:43:16 -0700
From:	Tadeusz Struk <tadeusz.struk@...el.com>
To:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
CC:	davem@...emloft.net, linux-aio@...ck.org,
	herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	ying.xue@...driver.com, bcrl@...ck.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, hch@....de,
	linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 1/4] net: socket: add support for async operations

On 03/19/2015 09:20 AM, Al Viro wrote:
> is completely pointless.  Just have sock_read_iter() and sock_write_iter()
> check if your new methods are present and use those if those are.
> 

Ok, that will work for me too.

> What's more, I'm not at all sure that you want to pass iocb that way -
> kernel-side msghdr isn't tied to userland one anymore, so we might as well
> stash a pointer to iocb into it.  Voila - no new methods needed at all.

Good point, so what do you prefer - to add iocd to msghdr or to call the new
methods from sock_read_iter() and sock_write_iter()?
Either way is good for me.

--
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