From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: mtk.manpages@gmail.com
Cc: mtk.manpages@googlemail.com, roland@redhat.com,
torvalds@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
drepper@redhat.com, vegard.nossum@gmail.com,
linux-man@vger.kernel.org, stable@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sys_waitid: return -EFAULT for NULL
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 15:24:57 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090113152457.0d7685ad.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cfd18e0f0901131514i2f7be7f1t2c6275c26dbb6874@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 12:14:20 +1300
"Michael Kerrisk" <mtk.manpages@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 11:49 AM, Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com> wrote:
> > It's always been invalid to call waitid() with a NULL pointer. It was an
> > oversight that it was allowed (and acts like a wait4() call instead).
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>
>
> Modulo the observation that this change will break any Linux-specific
> application that violate POSIX.1's requirement that infop not be NULL
> (*), and rely on the existing Linux behavior for
> waitd(idtype,id,NULL,options):
>
Well yes. waitid() has been in there since 2.6.9. I assume that it
has had this wait4-emulation mode for that amount of time as well?
>
> (*) It seems unlikely that such applications exist, and we really
> should make this change for POSIX.1 conformance.
Well, we might get away with it. But formally speaking, we should live
with our Linux-specific screwup.
If we _are_ going to make this change then we should merge it as far
back in -stable as we can, to reduce the risk that people will develop
applications on kernel version A only to have then behave differently
on version B.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-13 23:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <cfd18e0f0901131436ud2cf61bkf0e6b00f4b765bb5@mail.gmail.com>
2009-01-13 22:38 ` waitid() return value strangeness when infop is NULL Michael Kerrisk
2009-01-13 22:43 ` Michael Kerrisk
2009-01-13 22:47 ` Roland McGrath
2009-01-13 22:49 ` [PATCH] sys_waitid: return -EFAULT for NULL Roland McGrath
2009-01-13 23:14 ` Michael Kerrisk
2009-01-13 23:24 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2009-01-13 23:36 ` Michael Kerrisk
2009-01-13 23:47 ` Roland McGrath
2009-01-14 0:13 ` Michael Kerrisk
2009-01-14 0:24 ` Ulrich Drepper
2009-01-14 0:33 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-14 0:53 ` Michael Kerrisk
2009-01-14 0:57 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-14 1:39 ` Michael Kerrisk
2009-01-14 2:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-14 2:28 ` Michael Kerrisk
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=20090113152457.0d7685ad.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=drepper@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-man@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mtk.manpages@gmail.com \
--cc=mtk.manpages@googlemail.com \
--cc=roland@redhat.com \
--cc=stable@kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=vegard.nossum@gmail.com \
/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