linux-kernel - Re: [RFC/PATCH] revokeat/frevoke system calls V5

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: <45E32AFD.2050407@zytor.com>
Date:	Mon, 26 Feb 2007 10:46:21 -0800
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Alan <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
CC:	Zach Brown <zab@...bo.net>, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	hch@....de
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] revokeat/frevoke system calls V5

Alan wrote:
>> I'm not sure.  Turning, for example, the statat(dir_fd, name == NULL)  
>> error case into fstat(dir_fd) sounds like a way for apps, admittedly  
>> buggy ones, to be surprised.  Maybe libc would be exptected to catch  
>> the error before performing the shared system call?
> 
> At that point would it not be cheaper to have two system calls, the table
> cost isn't very large.

It's not just the table, though, you need two entry points, but even 
that isn't really all that big either, I guess.

	-hpa
-
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/