[ Let's see how long this lasts, but I've got a generator for the
laptop, and hopefully I'll be able to start doing pulls tonight, and
get "real" power tomorrow ]
On Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 11:30 AM Al Viro <v...@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>
> IOW, it's not iov_iter_revert() being weird or do_tty_write() misuing it -
> it's tpk_write() playing silly buggers.
Ok, that's actually not as bad I was was afraid it might be.
> Do we want to preserve that weirdness of /dev/ttyprintk writes?
> That's orthogonal to the iov_iter uses in there.
I don't think the ttyprintk weirdness was intentional. I'd fix that,
but in the meantime clearly we should make do_tty_write() protect
against this insanity, and do something like
--- a/drivers/tty/tty_io.c
+++ b/drivers/tty/tty_io.c
@@ -961,6 +961,9 @@ static inline ssize_t do_tty_write(
ret = write(tty, file, tty->write_buf, size);
if (ret <= 0)
break;
+ /* ttyprintk historical oddity */
+ if (ret > size)
+ break;
/* FIXME! Have Al check this! */
if (ret != size)
in there. Because right now we clearly do strange and not-so-wonderful
things if the write routine returns a bigger value than it was
passed.. Not limited to that iov_iter_revert() thing, but the whole
loop.
Comments?
Linus
