16.11.2024 04:10, Kuniyuki Iwashima пишет:
Now this allows sending pidfd without SO_PASSPIDFD, so you need to
add a validation for "if (!msg->msg_control)" in __scm_recv_common().
Will do, thanks.
Btw don't we need MSG_CTRUNC in
such case even if "msg_control"exists?
Or the established practice
16.11.2024 04:10, Kuniyuki Iwashima пишет:
Now this allows sending pidfd without SO_PASSPIDFD, so you need to
add a validation for "if (!msg->msg_control)" in __scm_recv_common().
Will do, thanks.
Btw don't we need MSG_CTRUNC in
such case even if "msg_control"exists? Or the established practice
16.11.2024 04:10, Kuniyuki Iwashima пишет:
[PATCH v2] net/unix: pass pidfd flags via SCM_PIDFD cmsg
Please specify the target tree; net for fixes, net-next for others.
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v6.11/process/maintainer-netdev.html
[PATCH net-next v3] af_unix: pass ...
Thanks for the
> [PATCH v2] net/unix: pass pidfd flags via SCM_PIDFD cmsg
Please specify the target tree; net for fixes, net-next for others.
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v6.11/process/maintainer-netdev.html
[PATCH net-next v3] af_unix: pass ...
From: Stas Sergeev
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2024 12:19:09 +0
Currently SCM_PIDFD cmsg cannot be sent via unix socket
(returns -EINVAL) and SO_PASSPIDFD doesn't support flags.
The created pidfd always has flags set to 0.
This patch implements SCM_PIDFD cmsg in AF_UNIX socket, which
can be used to send flags to SO_PASSPIDFD-enabled recipient.
Self-test is ad
5 matches
Mail list logo