ntry path
full_path = d_path(_path, buf, PATH_MAX);
if (strcmp(exclude, full_path) == 0) {
ret = -EACCES;
goto out;
}
... // clean up
}
On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 6:32 PM, wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Jul 2018 16:59:27 -0400, riya khanna said:
>
> > I'm trying to und
Hi,
I'm trying to understand what prevents TOCTTOU race conditions in
dentry_path_raw
and link_path_walk? What happens when somebody points a symlink path
component from a dir that has the attacker is allowed to read to a dir that
they are not allowed to read while link_path_walk() is doing its
On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 9:15 PM, Greg KH g...@kroah.com wrote:
On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 05:50:43PM -0600, riya khanna wrote:
On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 5:00 PM, Greg KH g...@kroah.com wrote:
On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 04:46:24PM -0600, riya khanna wrote:
The goal is to provide multiple instances
Hi,
I'm writing a device driver to to provide a wrapper device around a
real device. Is it acceptable to do the following:
wrapper_dev_open(flags) {
// do additional bookkeeping
real_dev_filp = filp_open(real_device_node_path, flags);
}
wrapper_dev_mmap(mmap_parameters) {
// do
struct real_dev-f_op would not be made available to the userspace.
It's for target/real device bookkeeping.
On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 4:02 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Mon, 02 Feb 2015 15:24:37 -0600, riya khanna said:
Hi,
I'm writing a device driver to to provide a wrapper device
I guess a userspace library approach won't be transparent to the applications.
On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 3:44 PM, Malte Vesper
malte.ves...@postgrad.manchester.ac.uk wrote:
From: Malte Vesper
Sent: 02 February 2015 21:43
To: riya khanna
Subject: RE
, riya khanna wrote:
I guess a userspace library approach won't be transparent to the
applications.
Look at cuse, I think it provides what you are wanting to do here.
But as you really didn't say what your goals are, it's hard to
determine.
good luck,
greg k-h
On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 5:00 PM, Greg KH g...@kroah.com wrote:
On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 04:46:24PM -0600, riya khanna wrote:
The goal is to provide multiple instances of a real device, where each
instance could be assigned to a container. This is to enable support
for device multiplexing
On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 8:49 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Mon, 02 Feb 2015 17:50:43 -0600, riya khanna said:
The purpose of multiplexing is to either block undesired
events/operations on devices (e.g. input, graphics) or respond to the
applications based on the in-memory state
Hi,
Is there a way, w.r.t memory contents, to make a process B see what
process A sees through shared memory mappings?
Suppose Process A has mapped a device file (say F) at address
0x in its address space. Is it possible for process B to see
the same device file F contents as process A
, Jan 12, 2015 at 2:08 AM, riya khanna riyakhanna1...@gmail.com
javascript:; wrote:
Hi,
Is there a way, w.r.t memory contents, to make a process B see what
process A sees through shared memory mappings?
Suppose Process A has mapped a device file (say F) at address
0x in its
...@vt.edu wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jan 2015 07:34:41 -0600, riya khanna said:
Suppose A and B have mapped the same physical memory or shmem file. I want
a way to make process A forcefuly revoke/remap the existing shared memory
mappings in process B, so that B sees whatever A does.
Umm..B should
client machine itself. NFS operations are not used to
override device files here. How about using iSCSI and all for devices?
Maybe you can tell something more about what you are trying to do?
Regards,
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 10:53 PM, riya khanna riyakhanna1...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi,
I'm
Hi,
I'm trying to access remote devices locally by mounting/exporting /dev
nodes over NFS. However, looks like the access requests are treated local
based on major minor numbers (e.g. cat /mnt-dev-over-nfs/kmg output is
same as cat /dev/kmsg)
How can I change this behavior? and if it is at all
14 matches
Mail list logo
