| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <1158130530.18619.156.camel@pmac.infradead.org> Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2006 07:55:30 +0100 From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org> To: Albert Cahalan <acahalan@...il.com> Cc: guest01@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: OT: calling kernel syscall manually On Wed, 2006-09-13 at 01:35 -0400, Albert Cahalan wrote: > > The third one has always been broken on i386 for PIC code > > No, I was just using it today in PIC i386 code. > The %ebx register gets pushed, the needed value > gets moved into %ebx, the int 0x80 is done, and > the %ebx register gets popped. Only a few odd > calls like clone() need something different. That's a very recent change -- it was broken for years before that. > > and was pointless anyway, since glibc provides this > > functionality. The kernel method has been removed from > > userspace visibility all architectures, and we plan to > > remove it entirely in 2.6.19 since it's not at all useful. > > It's damn useful. Hint: Linux does not require glibc. Are you being deliberately obtuse or is it just a natural talent? Other C libraries also provide syscall() -- at least dietlibc and uClibc do. Kernel headers do not exist to provide a library of random crap for userspace to use. -- dwmw2 - 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists