[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150930184129.GB23065@smitten>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 12:41:29 -0600
From: Tycho Andersen <tycho.andersen@...onical.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge.hallyn@...ntu.com>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] kcmp: add KCMP_FILE_PRIVATE_DATA
On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:25:41AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Tycho Andersen
> <tycho.andersen@...onical.com> wrote:
> > This command allows comparing the underling private data of two fds. This
> > is useful e.g. to find out if a seccomp filter is inherited, since struct
> > seccomp_filter are unique across tasks and are the private_data seccomp
> > fds.
>
> This is very implementation-specific and may have nasty ABI
> consequences far outside seccomp. Let's do something specific to
> seccomp and/or eBPF.
We could change the name to a less generic KCMP_SECCOMP_FD or
something, but without some sort of GUID on each struct
seccomp_filter, the implementation would be effectively the same as it
is today. Is that enough, or do we need a GUID?
Tycho
--
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