From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] net:add socket option for
 low latency polling
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 21:24:32 +0100
Message-ID: <1370982272.1954.8.camel@bwh-desktop.uk.level5networks.com>
References: <20130611142415.17879.75569.stgit@ladj378.jer.intel.com>
	<20130611142438.17879.6389.stgit@ladj378.jer.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>, Don,
	Or Gerlitz <or.gerlitz@gmail.com>,
	e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	HPA <hpa@zytor.com>, Amir Vadai <amirv@mellanox.com>,
	Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>,
	Eliezer Tamir <eliezer@tamir.org.il>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
	Eric Dumazet <erdnetdev@gmail.com>, Eilon Greenstien <eilong@broadcom.com>,
	David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: Eliezer Tamir <eliezer.tamir@linux.intel.com>
Return-path: <e1000-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net>
In-Reply-To: <20130611142438.17879.6389.stgit@ladj378.jer.intel.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel>,
	<mailto:e1000-devel-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=e1000-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:e1000-devel-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel>,
	<mailto:e1000-devel-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: e1000-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net
List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org

On Tue, 2013-06-11 at 17:24 +0300, Eliezer Tamir wrote:
> adds a socket option for low latency polling.
> This allows overriding the global sysctl value with a per-socket one.
[...]
> --- a/net/core/sock.c
> +++ b/net/core/sock.c
> @@ -913,6 +913,23 @@ set_rcvbuf:
>  		sock_valbool_flag(sk, SOCK_SELECT_ERR_QUEUE, valbool);
>  		break;
>  
> +#ifdef CONFIG_NET_LL_RX_POLL
> +	case SO_LL:
> +		if (!capable(CAP_NET_ADMIN))
> +			ret = -EACCES;
[...]

Failed capability checks normally result in EPERM whereas EACCES usually
results from a file permission/ACL/label check.

Perhaps unprivileged users should be allowed to set a value as long as
it's less than or equal to the global value?

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:

Build for Windows Store.

http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
E1000-devel mailing list
E1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel
To learn more about Intel&#174; Ethernet, visit http://communities.intel.com/community/wired