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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 20:46:54 +0400 From: Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru> To: mtk.manpages@...il.com Cc: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>, Alan Cox <alan@...hat.com>, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@...hat.com>, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> Subject: Re: sys_paccept: disable paccept() until API design is resolved Hi Michael. On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 02:24:32AM +0200, Michael Kerrisk (mtk.manpages@...glemail.com) wrote: > >> accept4(int fd, struct sockaddr *sa, socklen_t *salen, ind flags); > > > > The signal set wasn't actually my idea. See: > > > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=120909788728078&w=2 > > [CC=+ Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru>] > > But, what are you trying to say in pointing out that this wasn't your idea? I asked to put signal mask there to be able to siplify life of those who use accept() and signals. It is not 1005 _required_, but just like it is not required to be in ppoll(). It is an optimization which should allow to block signals during code execution without lots of additional steps (like disabling/enabling them around the call via additional syscalls). -- Evgeniy Polyakov -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists