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  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]
Date:	Sun, 17 Apr 2016 19:15:31 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <>
To:	Josh Triplett <>,
	Greg KH <>
Cc:	"Theodore Ts'o" <>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <>,
	"Richard W.M. Jones" <>,, Thomas Gleixner <>,, Andrew Morton <>,,, zab <>,,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <>,
	Pavel Emelyanov <>,,
	Milosz Tanski <>,
	rostedt <>,,, gorcunov <>,
	iulia manda21 <>,
	dave hansen <>,
	mguzik <>,,
	Davidlohr Bueso <>,
	linux-api <>,,, Linus Torvalds <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] vfs: Define new syscall getumask.

On 04/17/16 19:12, Josh Triplett wrote:
>> I really like the 'libinux' idea, did anyone every hack up a first-pass
>> at this?  And I'm guessing we have more syscalls now that would need to
>> be added (like getrandom(), but that shouldn't be too difficult.
> Personally, I'd suggest that libinux should wire up *all* (non-obsolete)
> syscalls, not just those that haven't already been exposed via any
> particular libc implementation.  Each such syscall function would have
> minimal overhead, since unlike libc these wrappers would not have any
> special handling (other than use of the vdso) and would directly map to
> the kernel syscall signature.  Given a standard prefix like sys_ or
> linux_, that would provide a clear distinction between direct-syscall
> functions and libc functions, and avoid any future conflict if libc adds
> a function named the same as the syscall.
> As a random example, sys_getpid() would *always* call the getpid
> syscall, rather than reading a cache within the library.  (And
> sys_gettid would call the gettid syscall, rather than failing to exist.)

I'm not so sure this is a good idea.  It has definite pros and cons.  In
some ways it pushes it more to be like syscall(3).


Powered by blists - more mailing lists