From: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
To: Ravikiran G Thirumalai <kiran@in.ibm.com>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
Kai Makisara <Kai.Makisara@metla.fi>,
Willem Riede <osst@riede.org>,
coda@cs.cmu.edu
Subject: Re: [patch 0/4] Cleanup file_count usage
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 09:31:54 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <16794.32730.184008.344036@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20041116135200.GA23257@impedimenta.in.ibm.com>
Ravikiran G Thirumalai writes:
> 2. Read to f_count at drivers/net/ppp_generic.c:
> The PPPIOCDETACH ioctl is failed if the device fd is duped and
> being polled by another process -- which is determined by a read
> to f_count. The comments in the code indicate that the PPPIOCDETACH
> ioctl should be junked and userland can use a workaround
> by closing the fd and reopening /dev/ppp. I can make a patch to junk
> PPPIOCDETACH, but is it okay to break binary compatibility? Paul?
I would very much rather not break binary compatibility. People using
ppp-2.4.2 or ppp-2.4.3 won't be affected by this change, but ppp-2.4.2
was released in January this year and I wouldn't be surprised if
some people are still using ppp-2.4.1 (or even ppp-2.4.0), which would
be affected.
I suggest that as a temporary compromise, we keep PPPIOCDETACH but
make it zero file->private_data without freeing the ppp structure that
it points to. That will cause a memory leak but will avoid the
possibility of using that memory after it is freed (in the case where
the descriptor has been dup'd and another process is doing a poll on
it).
We should make the kernel whinge loudly when anyone uses PPPIOCDETACH,
too. If/when 2.7.0 comes along we can remove it.
Paul.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-11-16 22:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-11-16 13:52 Ravikiran G Thirumalai
2004-11-16 13:57 ` [patch 1/4] Cleanup file_count usage: Bad usage at some .open, .release Ravikiran G Thirumalai
2004-11-16 14:03 ` [patch 2/4] Cleanup file_count usage: Error/debug messages on f_count reads Ravikiran G Thirumalai
2004-11-16 14:06 ` [patch 3/4] Cleanup file_count usage: Redundant check based on file_count Ravikiran G Thirumalai
2004-11-16 14:11 ` [patch 4/4] Cleanup file_count usage: Avoid file_count usage for hugetlb nattach reporting Ravikiran G Thirumalai
2004-11-16 14:24 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-11-16 22:31 ` Paul Mackerras [this message]
2004-11-17 16:50 ` [patch 0/4] Cleanup file_count usage Ravikiran G Thirumalai
2004-11-17 22:07 ` Paul Mackerras
2004-12-01 6:30 ` Ravikiran G Thirumalai
2004-11-16 22:56 ` Jan Harkes
2004-11-16 23:19 ` Jan Harkes
2004-11-17 0:57 ` Willem Riede
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=16794.32730.184008.344036@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com \
--to=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=Kai.Makisara@metla.fi \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=coda@cs.cmu.edu \
--cc=kiran@in.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=osst@riede.org \
--cc=viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®