linux-kernel - Re: x86_64: vsyscall vs vdso

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: <a36005b50709170735p7c98608ftf12398f7080131b9@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 17 Sep 2007 07:35:04 -0700
From:	"Ulrich Drepper" <drepper@...il.com>
To:	"Francis Moreau" <francis.moro@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: x86_64: vsyscall vs vdso

On 9/17/07, Francis Moreau <francis.moro@...il.com> wrote:
> Does that mean we'll need to keep 3 different implementations of gtod
> in the kernel forever ?

That's a question for the kernel maintainers to answer.

> I think signal trampolines will still need them too. So making
> vsyscalls configurable doesn't seem to work, does it ?

vsyscalls aren't used for that.  We have a restorer in libc and could
easily use one in the vdso.  That's what is done on x86.
-
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/