netdev - Re: [PATCH 1116/1285] Replace numeric parameter like 0444 with macro

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20160802191337.GD36313@redhat.com>
Date:	Tue, 2 Aug 2016 15:13:37 -0400
From:	Jarod Wilson <jarod@...hat.com>
To:	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...i.de>
Cc:	Baole Ni <baolex.ni@...el.com>,
	Linux Networking Developer Mailing List 
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, lvs-devel@...r.kernel.org,
	Netfilter Developer Mailing List 
	<netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	chuansheng.liu@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1116/1285] Replace numeric parameter like 0444 with macro

On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 08:07:11PM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> 
> On Tuesday 2016-08-02 14:17, Baole Ni wrote:
> 
> >I find that the developers often just specified the numeric value
> >when calling a macro which is defined with a parameter for access permission.
> >As we know, these numeric value for access permission have had the corresponding macro,
> >and that using macro can improve the robustness and readability of the code,
> >thus, I suggest replacing the numeric parameter with the macro.
> >
> > static int ip_vs_conn_tab_bits = CONFIG_IP_VS_TAB_BITS;
> >-module_param_named(conn_tab_bits, ip_vs_conn_tab_bits, int, 0444);
> >+module_param_named(conn_tab_bits, ip_vs_conn_tab_bits, int, S_IRUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH);
> 
> We have S_IRUGO for this.

Aye, for further edification, Baole, please read include/linux/stat.h,
particularly this part:

#define S_IRWXUGO       (S_IRWXU|S_IRWXG|S_IRWXO)
#define S_IALLUGO       (S_ISUID|S_ISGID|S_ISVTX|S_IRWXUGO)
#define S_IRUGO         (S_IRUSR|S_IRGRP|S_IROTH)
#define S_IWUGO         (S_IWUSR|S_IWGRP|S_IWOTH)
#define S_IXUGO         (S_IXUSR|S_IXGRP|S_IXOTH)

I suspect many of the patches in this set should be using one of the above
defines instead, never mind the ridiculousness of firing off such a
massive set at once, with every patch having the same (often not correct)
title, and the highly questionable benefit of the set to begin with.

-- 
Jarod Wilson
jarod@...hat.com