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, 18 May 2016 11:55:02 +0100 From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-afs@...ts.infradead.org, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, samba-technical@...ts.samba.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] statx: Add a system call to make enhanced file info available Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote: > I'm trying to understand what that means for the 64-bit time_t syscalls. > > The patch series I did last year had a replacement 'sys_newfstatat()' > syscall but IIRC no other stat variant, the idea being that we would > only need to provide this one to the libc and have user space emulate > the stat/fstat/lstat/fstatat variants based on that. > With the statx introduction, I was hoping to no longer have to add > that syscall but instead have libc do everything on top of sys_statx(). > > Do you think that is reasonable, given that we won't be allowed to > call any of the existing stat() variants for a y2038-safe libc build[1], > or should we plan to keep needing replacement fstatat (and possibly > stat/lstat/fstat) syscalls with 64-bit time_t even after statx() support > is merged into the kernel. Christoph?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists