linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/7] Minor Alpha updates for 3.11

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, 23 Jul 2013 07:20:22 -0800
From:	Richard Henderson <rth@...ddle.net>
To:	Michael Cree <cree@...kato.ac.nz>
CC:	Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	ink@...assic.park.msu.ru, mattst88@...il.com,
	linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] Minor Alpha updates for 3.11

On 07/22/2013 07:25 PM, Michael Cree wrote:
> I wondered if your proposal will break glibc as glibc checks for
> __NR_oldumount and does different things based on that.  But maybe your
> fix will not adversely affect glibc (I did not look particularly closely
> to see if so), but even so, there is no guarantee that other software does
> not directly access the oldumount syscall when compiled on Alpha, and your
> change would likely break any such software.

It won't break glibc.  While there are conditionals for oldumount,
they do pretty much exactly the umount/umount2 dance you'd expect.

I'm for the patch, because anything that makes us match x86 more
closely has got to be a good thing from a portability standpoint.


r~
--
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/