From: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>
To: Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>
Cc: Sargun Dhillon <sargun@sargun.me>,
linux-man <linux-man@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Tycho Andersen <tycho@tycho.ws>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@cyphar.com>,
Christian Brauner <christian@brauner.io>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
jld@mozilla.com, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>,
gpascutto@mozilla.com, ealvarez@mozilla.com
Subject: Re: [RESEND] RFC: pidfd_getfd(2) manual page
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2020 10:32:47 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKgNAkjeUo4j9f=nBvoK3Vg1U9MqT=SgQBxHQ046-eL1nFbF2w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200408074459.q3njmvizjge7timg@wittgenstein>
Hello Christian,
On Wed, 8 Apr 2020 at 09:45, Christian Brauner
<christian.brauner@ubuntu.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 07, 2020 at 08:49:35PM +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> > [No response on my mail of a week ago, so I try again; the page
> > text is unchanged since the draft sent out on 31 March]
>
> Sorry for the delay.
>
> >
> > Hello Sargun et al.
> >
> > I've taken a shot at writing a manual page for pidfd_getfd().
> > I would be happy to receive comments, suggestions for
> > improvements, etc. The text is as follows (the groff source
> > is at the foot of this mail):
>
> Thanks for that! Really appreciated. Just a few nits below.
Thanks for the review!
> > NAME
> > pidfd_getfd - obtain a duplicate of another process's file
> > descriptor
> >
> > SYNOPSIS
> > int pidfd_getfd(int pidfd, int targetfd, unsigned int flags);
> >
> > DESCRIPTION
> > The pidfd_getfd() system call allocates a new file descriptor in
> > the calling process. This new file descriptor is a duplicate of
> > an existing file descriptor, targetfd, in the process referred to
> > by the PID file descriptor pidfd.
> >
> > The duplicate file descriptor refers to the same open file
> > description (see open(2)) as the original file descriptor in the
> > process referred to by pidfd. The two file descriptors thus share
> > file status flags and file offset. Furthermore, operations on the
> > underlying file object (for example, assigning an address to a
> > socket object using bind(2)) can be equally be performed via the
>
> s/can be equally be performed/can be equally performed
> ?
Thanks. I made it: "can equally be performed"
> > duplicate file descriptor.
> >
> > The close-on-exec flag (FD_CLOEXEC; see fcntl(2)) is set on the
> > file descriptor returned by pidfd_getfd().
> >
> > The flags argument is reserved for future use. Currently, it must
> > be specified as 0.
> >
> > Permission to duplicate another process's file descriptor is gov‐
> > erned by a ptrace access mode PTRACE_MODE_ATTACH_REALCREDS check
> > (see ptrace(2)).
> >
> > RETURN VALUE
> > On success, pidfd_getfd() returns a nonnegative file descriptor.
>
> Imho, this makes it sound like there are negative file descriptor
> numbers. But as a non-native speaker that might just be a subtle
> misreading on my part. Maybe just like open() just mention:
> "On success, pidfd_getfd() returns a file descriptor."
You're right. That wording is just clumsy! I fixed it.
On success, pidfd_getfd() returns a file descriptor (a
nonnegative integer).
And I also fixed similar clumsy wordings in a number of other pages.
> > On error, -1 is returned and errno is set to indicate the cause of
> > the error.
> >
> > ERRORS
> > EBADF pidfd is not a valid PID file descriptor.
> >
> > EBADF targetfd is not an open file descriptor in the process
> > referred to by pidfd.
> >
> > EINVAL flags is not 0.
> >
> > EMFILE The per-process limit on the number of open file descrip‐
> > tors has been reached (see the description of RLIMIT_NOFILE
> > in getrlimit(2)).
> >
> > ENFILE The system-wide limit on the total number of open files has
> > been reached.
> >
> > ESRCH The process referred to by pidfd does not exist (i.e., it
> > has terminated and been waited on).
>
> EPERM The calling process did not have PTRACE_MODE_ATTACH_REALCREDS
> permissions (see ptrace(2)) over the process referred to by
> pidfd.
Oh yes. Thanks. Added.
> Technically, there should also be a disclaimer that other errno values
> are possible because of LSM denials, e.g. selinux could return EACCES or
> any other errno code in their file_receive() hook. But I'm not whether we
> generally do this. In any case, I would find it useful as a developer.
No, the manual pages don't generally include this. Mainly because I
just don't know all the details.
> (Is there actually a place where all LSMs are forced to record their
> errno returns for their security hooks for each syscall they hook into and
> that's visible to userspace? Because that'd be really useful...)
Nothing that I'm aware of, unfortunately.
Thanks again for the review!
Cheers,
Michael
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-04-08 8:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-04-07 18:49 [RESEND] RFC: pidfd_getfd(2) manual page Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2020-04-08 7:44 ` Christian Brauner
2020-04-08 8:32 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) [this message]
2020-04-08 10:58 ` AW: " Walter Harms
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='CAKgNAkjeUo4j9f=nBvoK3Vg1U9MqT=SgQBxHQ046-eL1nFbF2w@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=mtk.manpages@gmail.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=christian.brauner@ubuntu.com \
--cc=christian@brauner.io \
--cc=cyphar@cyphar.com \
--cc=ealvarez@mozilla.com \
--cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=gpascutto@mozilla.com \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=jld@mozilla.com \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-man@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=sargun@sargun.me \
--cc=tycho@tycho.ws \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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).