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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 06:33:43 -0400 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com> To: Matt Cover <werekraken@...il.com> Cc: davem@...emloft.net, ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, kafai@...com, songliubraving@...com, yhs@...com, Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>, Matthew Cover <matthew.cover@...ckpath.com>, mail@...urcelik.de, pabeni@...hat.com, Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com>, wangli39@...du.com, lifei.shirley@...edance.com, tglx@...utronix.de, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] tuntap: Fallback to automq on TUNSETSTEERINGEBPF prog negative return On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 03:46:19PM -0700, Matt Cover wrote: > Unless of course we can simply state via > documentation that any negative return > for which a define doesn't exist is > undefined behavior. In which case, > there is no old vs new behavior and > no need for an ioctl. Simply the > understanding provided by the > documentation. Unfortunately this isn't sufficient: software can easily return a wrong value by mistake, and become dependent on an undefined behaviour. -- MST
Powered by blists - more mailing lists