From: Steve Rago <sar@nec-labs.com>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
Network Development <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Michael Kerrisk-manpages <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Subject: Re: bug in passing file descriptors
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 12:51:11 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <525437FF.5020905@nec-labs.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131008164108.GO6882@two.firstfloor.org>
On 10/08/2013 12:41 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
>> I just want the semantics to be consistent. If you want Linux to
>> always require applications that call recvmsg to provide a buffer
>> size of CMSG_SPACE bytes long to retrieve control information, then
>> fail the system call when the buffer is smaller. But if you do
>> this, you risk breaking applications that work with FreeBSD, Mac OS
>> X, Solaris, and probably a few others.
>
> The primary concern is to be binary compatible with Linux.
>
> But not being compatible between 32bit and 64bit Linux processes on the same
> host would seem like a serious problem to me.
>
>> Regardless, copying 20 bytes and telling me you copied 24 is misleading and wrong.
>
> The question is could it break existing Linux applications to change it?
> And would it help with the 32/64bit compatibility?
>
> If not some other way to fix the compat layer would need to be found.
>
> -Andi
>
I'm not sure if a 64-bit process and a 32-bit process exchange file descriptors on the same system has a problem. It
certainly looks like the compat code does the right thing. I can test this tonight if you want. The discrepancy arises
because file descriptors are 4-byte quantities and treated differently (for example, when more than one is specified,
each one isn't padded to an 8-byte boundary).
The way I discovered the problem is that I had an example program in APUE that was validating that msg_controllen had
the correct value after calling recvmsg(). It worked on my 32-bit platform, but when I recompiled it and ran it on my
64-bit platform, the test failed, because msg_controllen was larger than the size that was sent via sendmsg().
Steve
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-10-08 16:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-10-07 18:27 bug in passing file descriptors Steve Rago
2013-10-07 18:44 ` Andy Lutomirski
2013-10-07 19:06 ` Steve Rago
2013-10-07 19:12 ` David Miller
2013-10-07 19:17 ` Steve Rago
2013-10-07 19:42 ` David Miller
2013-10-07 20:29 ` Steve Rago
2013-10-07 21:32 ` David Miller
2013-10-07 22:55 ` Andi Kleen
2013-10-08 14:32 ` Steve Rago
2013-10-08 16:02 ` Andy Lutomirski
2013-10-08 16:18 ` Steve Rago
2013-10-08 16:41 ` Andi Kleen
2013-10-08 16:51 ` Steve Rago [this message]
2013-10-09 14:07 ` Steve Rago
2013-10-08 8:43 ` David Laight
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=525437FF.5020905@nec-labs.com \
--to=sar@nec-labs.com \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=mtk.manpages@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).