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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 10:58:24 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com> CC: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>, 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 04/10/2012 05:09 PM, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > > I know the reason. fcntl(F_NEXT) is one of a proposal of next SUS enhancement. > > http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=149 > > nextfd() has a semantics of F_NEXT. > > Next, why shoundn't we implement fcntl(F_NEXT) in our kernel? I think > we have two reason. > > 1) As linus pointed out, linux specific "flags" argument may be useful. > 2) The name of F_NEXT is not fixed yet. another url of the austin says > it is FD_NEXT. > So, we can't choose right name yet. Moreover, A meanings of 3rd > argument of F_NEXT > haven't been fixed. > But it still has the same braindamage: one system call per loop invocation, and we can do better. I would much rather see fdwalk() in SUS. -hpa -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists