netdev - Re: [PATCH net 2/4] Revert "kill dev

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: <5812aacf62c99fcf98da7d4fc7eaa0ef9cd6afa1.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Date:   Sat, 26 Jan 2019 18:49:05 +0100
From:   Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To:     Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, Robert O'Callahan <robert@...llahan.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 2/4] Revert "kill dev_ifsioc()"

On Sat, 2019-01-26 at 18:45 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
> 
> Yes and no. It *sometimes* (actually rarely, since we don't really have
> dev_ioctls that much, afaict) hits this, but it could also just hit

Actually, no, I'm wrong. We do mostly hit dev_ioctl(), since that's the
common case for things like SIOCGIFNAME.

However, e.g. for SIOCGIFADDR we do go into

> static long sock_do_ioctl(struct net *net, struct socket *sock,
>                           unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
> {
> [...]
>         err = sock->ops->ioctl(sock, cmd, arg);
> [...]
>         if (err != -ENOIOCTLCMD)
>                 return err;

This, and like I said, plumbing the whole compat stuff through to the
sock->ops->ioctl() there doesn't seem like a great idea.

johannes