linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] unify 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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.1.10.0805031012580.5994@woody.linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Sat, 3 May 2008 10:13:24 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] unify sys_pipe implementation

On Sat, 3 May 2008, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> 
> +#ifdef __ARCH_WANT_SYS_PIPE
> +/*
> + * sys_pipe() is the normal C calling standard for creating
> + * a pipe. It's not the way Unix traditionally does this, though.
> + */
> +asmlinkage long sys_pipe(unsigned long __user *fildes)

Gaah. If you do this, at least clean it up and use "int *fildes", rather 
than copying the uglier old "unsigned long" ones that only exist because 
originally we had lots of odd int/long things that didn't matter on x86.

Yeah, yeah, the thing that matters is actually

> +	int fd[2];
>	...
> +		if (copy_to_user(fildes, fd, sizeof(fd)))

so it happens to work on all architectures anyway, but..

Also, we shouldn't need __ARCH_WANT_SYS_PIPE for this. Just make it 
unconditional, and then any architecture that wants somethign else can do 
their own "myarch_sys_pipe()" or whatever.

		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/