linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] sys

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.0.9999.0711151431220.4260@woody.linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Thu, 15 Nov 2007 14:33:39 -0800 (PST)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Zach Brown <zach.brown@...cle.com>
cc:	Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] sys_indirect system call



On Thu, 15 Nov 2007, Zach Brown wrote:
> 
> I think we can use this to pass per-syscall syslet data to the
> scheduler.

Yes, I mentioned this to Ulrich as one of the things that would make 
sense.

Uli doesn't care that much about async syscalls, but I think that from a 
kernel standpoint, we'd want to use this same indirect call for async 
scheduling, rather than have two separate interfaces (because async 
scheduling will want to have all the same flags intefaces for 
open/socket/etc *too* and a doubly-indirect setup would be insanity!)

And it definitely fits the bill as a really simple syslet model for the 
trivial case of doing just single system calls asynchronously.

		Linus
-
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/