linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] introduce kernel_execve function to replace __KERNEL_SYSCALLS_

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 22 Aug 2006 12:06:59 +0200
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Björn Steinbrink <B.Steinbrink@....de>
Cc:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Russell King <rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, rusty@...tcorp.com.au,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] introduce kernel_execve function to replace __KERNEL_SYSCALLS__

On Tuesday 22 August 2006 10:00, Björn Steinbrink wrote:
> I'm working on a patch loosely based on Arnd's that changes the
> in-kernel syscall macros to directly return the error codes.

I think that is still going in the wrong direction. Traditionally,
the macros in unistd.h were meant for user space, but we're now
discouraging that strongly (i.e. they are inside of #ifdef __KERNEL__).
The only in-kernel users on the _syscall macros used to by the
__KERNEL_SYSCALLS__ that we're trying to kill.

The logical consequence should be that we remove the _syscall macros
entirely, for all architectures.
UML can be converted to use the syscall function provided by libc
in order to call the host OS.

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