linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] nextfd(2)

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: <20120401213347.GC4408@p183.telecom.by>
Date:	Mon, 2 Apr 2012 00:33:47 +0300
From:	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
To:	Valentin Nechayev <netch@...ch.kiev.ua>
Cc:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, drepper@...il.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nextfd(2)

On Sun, Apr 01, 2012 at 09:28:26PM +0300, Valentin Nechayev wrote:
>  Sun, Apr 01, 2012 at 15:57:42, adobriyan wrote about "[PATCH] nextfd(2)": 
> 
> > So, don't add closefrom(2), add nextfd(2).
> > 
> > 	int nextfd(int fd)
> 
> Is it really needed here to create syscall? One shall update all arch
> lists for it. Instead, adding a new option for fcntl() (named e.g.
> F_NEXTFD) solves for all platforms simultaneously.

This is not a problem, build system even checks for not yet added syscalls.
Explicit syscall is better than multiplexer.
--
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/