linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 13/36] x86/ioport: add ksys_ioperm() helper; remove in-kernel calls to sys

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:   Fri, 16 Mar 2018 12:13:04 +0100
From:   Dominik Brodowski <linux@...inikbrodowski.net>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
        viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, luto@...nel.org, mingo@...nel.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, arnd@...db.de,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.com>,
        x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 13/36] x86/ioport: add ksys_ioperm() helper; remove
 in-kernel calls to sys_ioperm()

On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 01:43:08AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 08:05:06PM +0100, Dominik Brodowski wrote:
> > Using this helper allows us to avoid the in-kernel calls to the sys_ioperm()
> > syscall.
> 
> Why not do_ioperm or kernel_ioperm as for most other syscalls?

The newly introduced ksys_*() functions/helpers/wrappers take the same
parameters and use the same calling conventions as the "real" syscalls, and
are made available through include/linux/syscalls.h for (at least temporary)
in-kernel use.

Contrary to that, do_*() are mostly kept internal to one file or subsystem,
and seem to be more flexible with the calling convention. Same for
kernel_*().

But if you prefer the do_*() or kernel_*() namespace for the
in-kernel-syscall-equivalent for fs/*, I'm fine with that, just let me know.

Thanks,
	Dominik