Re: [PATCH -next 0/3] sysvipc: introduce STAT_ALL commands

[Davidlohr Bueso]

On Tue, 13 Feb 2018, Eric W. Biederman wrote:

> Davidlohr Bueso <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > The following patches adds the discussed[1] new command for shm
> > as well as for sems and msq as they are subject to the same discrepancies
> > for ipc object permission checks between the syscall and via procfs.
> > These new commands are justified in that (1) we are stuck with this
> > semantics as changing syscall and procfs can break userland; and (2) some
> > users can benefit from performance (for large amounts of shm segments,
> > for example) from not having to parse the procfs interface.
> >
> > Once (if) merged, I will submit the necesary manpage updates. But I'm
> > thinking something like:
>
> I am just going to kibitz for a moment.

Nice word that, kibitz.

> Could we name this _STAT_ANY or _STAT_NOPERM instead of _STAT_ALL.
>
> I keep thinking a name with _ALL in it should affect all ipc opbjects of
> a given type, not simply work any ipc object regardless of permissions.

Yeah, and _ALL similarly makes the difference of IPC_STAT and SHM_STAT wrt
the passed shmid that more adhoc.

I'm going to go with _STAT_ANY.

Thanks,
Davidlohr