lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Mar]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: Yet another pipe related oops.
From
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 8:20 AM, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>
> Actually, that's my fault - check lost in patch reordering. My apologies ;-/
> Eventually, we want that in fs/splice.c side of things (no point repeating it
> for every buffer, after all), but for now this is the obvious minimal fix.

Applied.

Do we actually have files with NULL f_ops pointers? Should we? What
could we possibly do with a file descriptor that doesn't have any
fops?

Also, perhaps we should do something more akin to what we do for
dentry functions where we validate them on registration, and we could
fix up or validate read/write pointers, with semantics something like

if (!fop->write)
fop->write = fop->aio_write ? do_sync_write : EINVAL_write;
if (!fop->read)
fop->read = fop->aio_read ? do_sync_read : EINVAL_read;

kind of things?

Not a big deal, perhaps.

Linus


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-03-27 18:21    [W:0.124 / U:0.416 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site