| 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: Fri, 07 Nov 2014 15:30:52 +0100 From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> To: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, "linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org" <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>, Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>, "keescook@...omium.org" <keescook@...omium.org>, "roland@...k.frob.com" <roland@...k.frob.com>, "oleg@...hat.com" <oleg@...hat.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@...aro.org>, "dsaxena@...aro.org" <dsaxena@...aro.org> Subject: Re: [RFC] ptrace: add generic SET_SYSCALL request On Friday 07 November 2014 13:11:30 Will Deacon wrote: > > > It's not that I care strongly about the interface, my main point is > > that the changelog doesn't describe why one interface was used instead > > the other. > > I suspect the current approach was taken because it follows the same scheme > as 32-bit ARM. If both methods are sufficient (Kees would have a better idea > than me on that), then I don't have a strong preference. Using the regset would probably address Oleg's comment, and would keep the implementation architecture specific. You could even share the NT_S390_SYSTEM_CALL number, but I don't know if there any downsides to doing that. Arnd -- 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