public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, mhocko@kernel.org,
	mtk.manpages@gmail.com, keescook@chromium.org,
	linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next 0/3] sysvipc: introduce STAT_ALL commands
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 14:21:31 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <878tbw3ak4.fsf@xmission.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180213174136.6346-1-dave@stgolabs.net> (Davidlohr Bueso's message of "Tue, 13 Feb 2018 09:41:33 -0800")

Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> writes:

> Hi,
>
> The following patches adds the discussed[1] new command for shm
> as well as for sems and msq as they are subject to the same discrepancies
> for ipc object permission checks between the syscall and via procfs.
> These new commands are justified in that (1) we are stuck with this
> semantics as changing syscall and procfs can break userland; and (2) some
> users can benefit from performance (for large amounts of shm segments,
> for example) from not having to parse the procfs interface.
>
> Once (if) merged, I will submit the necesary manpage updates. But I'm
> thinking something like:

I am just going to kibitz for a moment.

Could we name this _STAT_ANY or _STAT_NOPERM instead of _STAT_ALL.

I keep thinking a name with _ALL in it should affect all ipc opbjects of
a given type, not simply work any ipc object regardless of permissions.

Eric

> diff --git a/man2/shmctl.2 b/man2/shmctl.2
> index 7bb503999941..bb00bbe21a57 100644
> --- a/man2/shmctl.2
> +++ b/man2/shmctl.2
> @@ -41,6 +41,7 @@
>  .\" 2005-04-25, mtk -- noted aberrant Linux behavior w.r.t. new
>  .\"	attaches to a segment that has already been marked for deletion.
>  .\" 2005-08-02, mtk: Added IPC_INFO, SHM_INFO, SHM_STAT descriptions.
> +.\" 2018-02-13, dbueso: Added SHM_STAT_ALL description.
>  .\"
>  .TH SHMCTL 2 2017-09-15 "Linux" "Linux Programmer's Manual"
>  .SH NAME
> @@ -242,6 +243,18 @@ However, the
>  argument is not a segment identifier, but instead an index into
>  the kernel's internal array that maintains information about
>  all shared memory segments on the system.
> +.TP
> +.BR SHM_STAT_ALL " (Linux-specific)"
> +Return a
> +.I shmid_ds
> +structure as for
> +.BR SHM_STAT .
> +However, the
> +.I shm_perm.mode
> +is not checked for read access for
> +.IR shmid ,
> +resembing the behaviour of
> +/proc/sysvipc/shm.
>  .PP
>  The caller can prevent or allow swapping of a shared
>  memory segment with the following \fIcmd\fP values:
> @@ -287,7 +300,7 @@ operation returns the index of the highest used entry in the
>  kernel's internal array recording information about all
>  shared memory segments.
>  (This information can be used with repeated
> -.B SHM_STAT
> +.B SHM_STAT/SHM_STAT_ALL
>  operations to obtain information about all shared memory segments
>  on the system.)
>  A successful
> @@ -328,7 +341,7 @@ isn't accessible.
>  \fIshmid\fP is not a valid identifier, or \fIcmd\fP
>  is not a valid command.
>  Or: for a
> -.B SHM_STAT
> +.B SHM_STAT/SHM_STAT_ALL
>  operation, the index value specified in
>  .I shmid
>  referred to an array slot that is currently unused.
>
>
> Thanks!
>
> [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/12/19/220
>
> Davidlohr Bueso (3):
>   ipc/shm: introduce shmctl(SHM_STAT_ALL)
>   ipc/sem: introduce shmctl(SEM_STAT_ALL)
>   ipc/msg: introduce shmctl(MSG_STAT_ALL)
>
>  include/uapi/linux/msg.h |  1 +
>  include/uapi/linux/sem.h |  1 +
>  include/uapi/linux/shm.h |  5 +++--
>  ipc/msg.c                | 17 ++++++++++++-----
>  ipc/sem.c                | 17 ++++++++++++-----
>  ipc/shm.c                | 23 ++++++++++++++++++-----
>  security/selinux/hooks.c |  3 +++
>  7 files changed, 50 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)

  parent reply	other threads:[~2018-02-13 20:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-02-13 17:41 [PATCH -next 0/3] sysvipc: introduce STAT_ALL commands Davidlohr Bueso
2018-02-13 17:41 ` [PATCH 1/3] ipc/shm: introduce shmctl(SHM_STAT_ALL) Davidlohr Bueso
2018-02-13 17:41 ` [PATCH 2/3] ipc/sem: introduce shmctl(SEM_STAT_ALL) Davidlohr Bueso
2018-02-13 17:41 ` [PATCH 3/3] ipc/msg: introduce shmctl(MSG_STAT_ALL) Davidlohr Bueso
2018-02-13 20:21 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2018-02-13 22:09   ` [PATCH -next 0/3] sysvipc: introduce STAT_ALL commands Davidlohr Bueso
2018-02-13 23:06 ` Andrew Morton
2018-02-14  0:42   ` Davidlohr Bueso

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=878tbw3ak4.fsf@xmission.com \
    --to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=mtk.manpages@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