Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200815182344.7469-1-kalou@tfz.net> <20200815182344.7469-3-kalou@tfz.net>
 <7c910594-b297-646e-9410-f133fd62a902@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7c910594-b297-646e-9410-f133fd62a902@gmail.com>
From:   Pascal Bouchareine <kalou@tfz.net>
Date:   Sun, 16 Aug 2020 12:30:23 -0700
Message-ID: <CAGbU3_=HQKHOzy_sq+gkLs-QDsQ4OmALbitaCvTp1hxVzAr_vw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] net: socket: implement SO_DESCRIPTION
To:     Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>,
        Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, Aug 16, 2020 at 11:15 AM Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 1) You also ignored what would happen at accept() time.
>
> Please test your patches with ASAN.

Ouch, I will look into it - thanks for pointing that out & 3/

>
> 2) Also, why is that description specific to sockets ?

fcntl on struct file was deemed too intrusive - as far as fds are
concerned, regular files and pipes have names and local processes to
match against anyway
we're left with mostly remote targets - one example was to preserve
target host names after resolution (alas, I don't think there's a
clean flow to hook that transparently)