lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Apr]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: POSIX message queues, libmqueue: mq_open, mq_unlink
* Alex Riesen (fork0@users.sourceforge.net) wrote:
> My concern is that the tests are rather pointing that something in
> kernel is not implemented correctly. _The_ checks in particular.
> Because if they _are_ implemented correctly, you don't need to patch the
> functionality in the user space.
>
> And if the kernel code does check the incoming arguments correctly,
> what is the point to check them again? Just to make the point, that
> passing in not an absolute path is not portable?

The kernel interface is simple and clean. And in fact, requires no
slashes else you'll get -EACCES. It's not POSIX, but the library
interface is.

We just discussed this yesterday:

http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=108205593100003&r=1&w=2

thanks,
-chris
--
Linux Security Modules http://lsm.immunix.org http://lsm.bkbits.net
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:02    [W:0.054 / U:0.236 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site