From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 11:56:36 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <20180523.115636.2241611659399097483.davem@davemloft.net> To: g.nault@alphalink.fr Cc: ebiggers3@gmail.com, linux-ppp@vger.kernel.org, paulus@samba.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com, ebiggers@google.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] ppp: remove the PPPIOCDETACH ioctl From: David Miller In-Reply-To: <20180523135708.GB1569@alphalink.fr> References: <20180523032958.GE658@sol.localdomain> <20180523035952.25768-1-ebiggers3@gmail.com> <20180523135708.GB1569@alphalink.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Guillaume Nault Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 15:57:08 +0200 > I'd rather add > + if (cmd == PPPIOCDETACH) { > + err = -EINVAL; > + goto out; > + } > > Making PPPIOCDETACH unknown to ppp_generic means that the ioctl would > be handled by the underlying channel when pf->kind == CHANNEL (see the > chan->ops->ioctl() call further down). That shouldn't be a problem per > se, but even though PPPIOCDETACH is unsupported, I feel that it should > remain a ppp_generic thing. I don't really want its value to be reused > for other purposes in the future or have different behaviour depending > on the underlying channel. > > Also PPPIOCDETACH can already fail with -EINVAL. Therefore, if ever > there really were programs out there using this call, they'd already > have to handle this case. Unconditionally returning -EINVAL would > further minimise possibilities for breakage. I agree.