On Sun, 20 May 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > I think it fits the rule "buffer must be big enough for at least one sigingo".
> > We use the special return 0; as indicator that the process we were
> > monitoring signals, detached the sighand.
> >
>
> hm. Kernel violates proper read() semantics in many places. Looks like we
> just did it again.
I think we can have the check that "if size == 0 return 0". The above
cited return-0-on-detch would still apply for enough sized buffers. So:
1) size == 0, return 0 (POSIX wants this)
2) size < sizeof(signalfd_siginfo), return EINVAL
3) size >= sizeof(signalfd_siginfo) && DETACH, return 0
The signalfd falls into what POSIX defined as "special file", and can
return a lower-than-size result.
> Unless we just remove the __clear_user() altogether. Who said that "Unused
> memebers should be zero"?
Because it is a typically used value for still-unused/reserved members?
Better than random values I think ;)
Members validity is driven by si_code & SI_MASK anyway.
- Davide
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
