Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org-S266566AbUIJAsb@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S266566AbUIJAsb (ORCPT <rfc822;willy@w.ods.org>);
	Thu, 9 Sep 2004 20:48:31 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266574AbUIJAsb
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Thu, 9 Sep 2004 20:48:31 -0400
Received: from open.hands.com ([195.224.53.39]:53727 "EHLO open.hands.com")
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266566AbUIJAsQ (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 9 Sep 2004 20:48:16 -0400
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 01:59:32 +0100
From: Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl@lkcl.net>
To: Chris Wright <chrisw@osdl.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] update: _working_ code to add device+inode check to ipt_owner.c
Message-ID: <20040910005932.GA11160@lkcl.net>
References: <20040909162200.GB9456@lkcl.net> <20040909091931.K1973@build.pdx.osdl.net> <20040909181034.GF10046@lkcl.net> <20040909114846.V1924@build.pdx.osdl.net> <20040909212514.GA10892@lkcl.net> <20040909160449.E1924@build.pdx.osdl.net> <20040910000819.GA7587@lkcl.net> <20040909172134.G1924@build.pdx.osdl.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20040909172134.G1924@build.pdx.osdl.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i
X-hands-com-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-hands-com-MailScanner-SpamScore: s
X-MailScanner-From: lkcl@lkcl.net
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1475
Lines: 44

On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 05:21:35PM -0700, Chris Wright wrote:
> >  under such circumstances [file descs passed between programs]...
> >  you would end up having to create _two_ program-specific rules, like
> >  above.
> > 
> >  one for each of the two programs.
> 
> Actually you wouldn't, just one.  It will match, then one of those
> processes will get woken up and receive the data, regardless of whether
> you meant to allow it.  

 blehhrrr....

 oh i get it.  
 
 is that like someone writing really poor quality code where
 you have two processes reading from the same socket, wot like
 you're not supposed to do?

 or are there real instances / times where you really _do_ want
 that sort of thing to happen (xinetd?)

 [btw the sk_socket->file thing isn't filled in on input packets,
  but you still get the packet.  arg.  how the heck does ip_queue
  get enough info???]

 ta,

 l.

-- 
--
Truth, honesty and respect are rare commodities that all spring from
the same well: Love.  If you love yourself and everyone and everything
around you, funnily and coincidentally enough, life gets a lot better.
--
<a href="http://lkcl.net">      lkcl.net      </a> <br />
<a href="mailto:lkcl@lkcl.net"> lkcl@lkcl.net </a> <br />

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/