Re: Yet another pipe related oops.

[Linus Torvalds]

On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 8:20 AM, Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Actually, that's my fault - check lost in patch reordering.  My apologies ;-/
> Eventually, we want that in fs/splice.c side of things (no point repeating it
> for every buffer, after all), but for now this is the obvious minimal fix.

Applied.

Do we actually have files with NULL f_ops pointers? Should we? What
could we possibly do with a file descriptor that doesn't have any
fops?

Also, perhaps we should do something more akin to what we do for
dentry functions where we validate them on registration, and we could
fix up or validate read/write pointers, with semantics something like

    if (!fop->write)
        fop->write = fop->aio_write ? do_sync_write : EINVAL_write;
    if (!fop->read)
        fop->read = fop->aio_read ? do_sync_read : EINVAL_read;

kind of things?

Not a big deal, perhaps.

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