linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V3 2/5] mm: mlock: Add new mlock, munlock, and munlockall system calls

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: <20150708064607.GB7079@osiris>
Date:	Wed, 8 Jul 2015 08:46:07 +0200
From:	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
To:	Eric B Munson <emunson@...mai.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	adi-buildroot-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	linux-cris-kernel@...s.com, linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org, linux-mips@...ux-mips.org,
	linux-am33-list@...hat.com, linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org,
	linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-sh@...r.kernel.org, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-xtensa@...ux-xtensa.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 2/5] mm: mlock: Add new mlock, munlock, and munlockall
 system calls

On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 01:03:40PM -0400, Eric B Munson wrote:
> With the refactored mlock code, introduce new system calls for mlock,
> munlock, and munlockall.  The new calls will allow the user to specify
> what lock states are being added or cleared.  mlock2 and munlock2 are
> trivial at the moment, but a follow on patch will add a new mlock state
> making them useful.
> 
> munlock2 addresses a limitation of the current implementation.  If a
> user calls mlockall(MCL_CURRENT | MCL_FUTURE) and then later decides
> that MCL_FUTURE should be removed, they would have to call munlockall()
> followed by mlockall(MCL_CURRENT) which could potentially be very
> expensive.  The new munlockall2 system call allows a user to simply
> clear the MCL_FUTURE flag.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Eric B Munson <emunson@...mai.com>

...

> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/syscalls.S b/arch/s390/kernel/syscalls.S
> index 1acad02..f6d81d6 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/syscalls.S
> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/syscalls.S
> @@ -363,3 +363,6 @@ SYSCALL(sys_bpf,compat_sys_bpf)
>  SYSCALL(sys_s390_pci_mmio_write,compat_sys_s390_pci_mmio_write)
>  SYSCALL(sys_s390_pci_mmio_read,compat_sys_s390_pci_mmio_read)
>  SYSCALL(sys_execveat,compat_sys_execveat)
> +SYSCALL(sys_mlock2,compat_sys_mlock2)			/* 355 */
> +SYSCALL(sys_munlock2,compat_sys_munlock2)
> +SYSCALL(sys_munlockall2,compat_sys_munlockall2)

FWIW, you would also need to add matching lines to the two files

arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h
arch/s390/kernel/compat_wrapper.c

so that the system call would be wired up on s390.

--
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/