linux-kernel - Re: [patch 00/11] ANNOUNCE: "Syslets", generic asynchronous system call support

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]

Message-ID: <d120d5000702130746k1a110efcice6630827510e96c@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 13 Feb 2007 10:46:03 -0500
From:	"Dmitry Torokhov" <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
To:	Alan <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc:	"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Arjan van de Ven" <arjan@...radead.org>,
	"Christoph Hellwig" <hch@...radead.org>,
	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@....com.au>,
	"Ulrich Drepper" <drepper@...hat.com>,
	"Zach Brown" <zach.brown@...cle.com>,
	"Evgeniy Polyakov" <johnpol@....mipt.ru>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"Benjamin LaHaise" <bcrl@...ck.org>,
	"Suparna Bhattacharya" <suparna@...ibm.com>,
	"Davide Libenzi" <davidel@...ilserver.org>,
	"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [patch 00/11] ANNOUNCE: "Syslets", generic asynchronous system call support

On 2/13/07, Alan <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> > A syslet is executed opportunistically: i.e. the syslet subsystem
> > assumes that the syslet will not block, and it will switch to a
> > cachemiss kernel thread from the scheduler. This means that even a
>
> How is scheduler fairness maintained ? and what is done for resource
> accounting here ?
>
> > that the kernel fills and user-space clears. Waiting is done via the
> > sys_async_wait() system call. Completion can be supressed on a per-atom
>
> They should be selectable as well iff possible.
>
> > Open issues:
>
> Let me add some more
>
>        sys_setuid/gid/etc need to be synchronous only and not occur
> while other async syscalls are running in parallel to meet current kernel
> assumptions.
>
>        sys_exec and other security boundaries must be synchronous only
> and not allow async "spill over" (consider setuid async binary patching)
>
> >  - sys_fork() and sys_async_exec() should be filtered out from the
> >    syscalls that are allowed - first one only makes sense with ptregs,
>
> clone and vfork. async_vfork is a real mindbender actually.
>
> >    second one is a nice kernel recursion thing :) I didnt want to
> >    duplicate the sys_call_table though - maybe others have a better
> >    idea.
>
> What are the semantics of async sys_async_wait and async sys_async ?
>

Ooooohh. OpenVMS lives forever ;) Me likeee ;)

-- 
Dmitry
-
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/