linux-kernel - Re: [Question] New mmap64 syscall?

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]

Date:   Wed, 7 Dec 2016 14:23:55 +0100
From:   Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>
To:     Yury Norov <ynorov@...iumnetworks.com>, libc-alpha@...rceware.org,
        linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, szabolcs.nagy@....com,
        heiko.carstens@...ibm.com, cmetcalf@...hip.com,
        philipp.tomsich@...obroma-systems.com, joseph@...esourcery.com,
        zhouchengming1@...wei.com, Prasun.Kapoor@...iumnetworks.com,
        agraf@...e.de, geert@...ux-m68k.org, kilobyte@...band.pl,
        manuel.montezelo@...il.com, arnd@...db.de, pinskia@...il.com,
        linyongting@...wei.com, klimov.linux@...il.com, broonie@...nel.org,
        bamvor.zhangjian@...wei.com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        maxim.kuvyrkov@...aro.org, Nathan_Lynch@...tor.com,
        schwidefsky@...ibm.com, davem@...emloft.net,
        christoph.muellner@...obroma-systems.com
Subject: Re: [Question] New mmap64 syscall?

On 12/06/2016 07:54 PM, Yury Norov wrote:
> 3. Introduce new mmap64() syscall like this:
> sys_mmap64(void *addr, size_t len, int prot, int flags, int fd, struct off_pair *off);
> (The pointer here because otherwise we have 7 args, if simply pass off_hi and
> off_lo in registers.)

I would prefer a batched mmap/munmap/mremap/mprotect/madvise interface, 
so that VM changes can be coalesced and the output reduced.  This 
interface could then be used to implement mmap on 32-bit architectures 
as well because the offset restrictions would not apply there.

Thanks,
Florian