linux-kernel - Re: microblaze syscall list

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]

Date:	Fri, 02 May 2008 10:18:25 +0200
From:	Michal Simek <monstr@...nam.cz>
To:	John Williams <john.williams@...alogix.com>
CC:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>,
	Will Newton <will.newton@...il.com>,
	Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, git@...inx.com,
	Stephen Neuendorffer <stephen.neuendorffer@...inx.com>,
	John Linn <John.Linn@...inx.com>
Subject: Re: microblaze syscall list

Hi All,

>>> How about this strategy then:
>>> * Change all the data types and syscall numbers in the -for-2.6.27
>>> branch to only include the minimal set, and a modern ABI
>>> * Add the old interfaces as an out-of-tree patch that adds source
>>> level compatibility with the old libc, but does not modify any
>>> of the new interfaces, so that a patched kernel can run all binaries
>>> built for the upstream version.
>>> * phase out the old source interface gradually, as all users update
>>> their libc source code.
>>
>>
>> Any news on this from the microblaze people? Have you made up your mind
>> on what route you want to go?
> 
> I think we're still digesting it.  I need to sync up with Michal and the
> Xilinx people.  The libc and kernel API changes have to happen in
> tandem, otherwise Michal can't properly test the kernel he's pushing.
> 
> I am the defacto MicroBlaze uClibc and toolchain "builder" but somewhat
> reluctantly - am trying to convince Xilnx to hand that over to someone
> who is expert at it.
> 
> Michal, John L, any thoughts?
> 
> John

I am convinced we need to change syscall table. I don't want to maintain old
syscalls. It will be easier to test smaller amount of syscalls. I would like to
talk about with you (John W) via Skype. (Can you send me private email where you
have time?) I talked with Steve about this week. After that I will publish our
proposed way.

Michal




--
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/