On 10/23/20 9:25 AM, Rolf Eike Beer wrote:
>> +#define O_NONBLOCK_OLD 000200004
>> +#define O_NONBLOCK_MASK_OUT (O_NONBLOCK_OLD & ~O_NONBLOCK)
>> +static int FIX_O_NONBLOCK(int flags)
>> +{
>> + if (flags & O_NONBLOCK_MASK_OUT) {
>> + struct task_struct *tsk = current;
>> + pr_warn("%s(%d) uses old O_NONBLOCK value. "
>> + "Please recompile the application.\n",
>> + tsk->comm, tsk->pid);
>> + }
>> + return flags & ~O_NONBLOCK_MASK_OUT;
>> +}
>
> This will also trigger if I just pass 0x4 in flags, no? The check should be
>
> if ((flags & O_NONBLOCK_OLD) == O_NONBLOCK_OLD)
RIGHT!
That's a very good point.
I was thinking about what would happen if over time a new (unrelated) define
gets created which then gets 0x4 as value. My code would then have wrongly
modified it.
I'll fix this.
> because that would correctly reject a bare 0x4, at least I hope that this
> would already happen with the strict checking you mentioned.
>
> Would a pr_warn_once make sense? Otherwise your log may get flooded by them if
> e.g. sudo is the problem and my nagios comes every minute to check something.
I like the idea.
Helge
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
