netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/3] net: set FMODE

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]

Date: Thu, 11 May 2023 07:30:34 -0600
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, io-uring@...r.kernel.org
Cc: torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
 Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] net: set FMODE_NOWAIT for sockets

On 5/11/23 2:03?AM, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> On Tue, 2023-05-09 at 09:19 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> The socket read/write functions deal with O_NONBLOCK and IOCB_NOWAIT
>> just fine, so we can flag them as being FMODE_NOWAIT compliant. With
>> this, we can remove socket special casing in io_uring when checking
>> if a file type is sane for nonblocking IO, and it's also the defined
>> way to flag file types as such in the kernel.
>>
>> Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
>> Cc: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
>> Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
>> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
>> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
>> ---
>>  net/socket.c | 1 +
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/net/socket.c b/net/socket.c
>> index a7b4b37d86df..6861dbbfadb6 100644
>> --- a/net/socket.c
>> +++ b/net/socket.c
>> @@ -471,6 +471,7 @@ struct file *sock_alloc_file(struct socket *sock, int flags, const char *dname)
>>  		return file;
>>  	}
>>  
>> +	file->f_mode |= FMODE_NOWAIT;
>>  	sock->file = file;
>>  	file->private_data = sock;
>>  	stream_open(SOCK_INODE(sock), file);
> 
> The patch looks sane to me:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
> 
> I understand the intention is merging patch via the io_uring tree? If
> so, no objections on my side: hopefully it should not cause any
> conflicts with the netdev tree.

If it's fine with you guys, then yeah that would make my life easier.
Risk of conflicts should be very low, and trivial if it does occur.
Thanks for the review!

-- 
Jens Axboe