On Wed, 31 May 2000, Khimenko Victor wrote:
> In <Pine.GSO.4.10.10005301705460.17448-100000@weyl.math.psu.edu> Alexander Viro (viro@math.psu.edu) wrote:
>
>
> AV> On Wed, 31 May 2000, Chris Wedgwood wrote:
>
> >> On Sun, May 28, 2000 at 01:46:01PM +0400, Khimenko Victor wrote:
> >>
> >> So it's not just me. Is it known issue ? Even if locking on unix
> >> sockets is not supported (why?) kernel oops and segmentation
> >> fault does not look like right rection to me :-/
> >>
> >> Open should fail on unix sockets. Does this fix your problem?
>
> AV> WTF? open() _does_ fail on them.
>
> Do you think so ? See attachments (sample program, strace and kernel oops).
> Yes, if open will fail on them it'll be acceptable (not pretty, but
> acceptable - postgresql will be unable to track socket usage but will
> start anyway "in hope for best"). Unfortunatelly id DOES NOT fail and then
> you getting oops (and core dump) out of fcntl.
Ouch... Yes, init_special_inode() should set ->i_fops for sockets. And
yes, prohibit the open() - if you want to watch the thing you ought to use
connect(), since anything else will be blatantly non-portable even if we
make such open() an equivalent of connect().
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 31 2000 - 21:00:25 EST