linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] clone3 for v5.3

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: <20190711053428.ofapcx7nn5xkyru4@brauner.io>
Date:   Thu, 11 Jul 2019 07:34:29 +0200
From:   Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] clone3 for v5.3

On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 10:24:26PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 8:05 AM Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io> wrote:
> >
> > /* Syscall number 435 */
> > clone3() uses syscall number 435 and is coordinated with pidfd_open() which
> > uses syscall number 434. I'm not aware of any other syscall targeted for
> > 5.3 that has chosen the same number.
> 
> You say that, and 434/435 would make sense, but that's not what the
> code I see in the pull request actually does.
> 
> It seems to use syscall 436.
> 
> I think it's because openat2() is looking to use 435, but I'm a bit
> nervous about the conflict between the code and your commentary..

Sorry, that was just me being dumb and forgetting that there was
close_range() which had a chance of going through Al's tree. So I left a
hole for it.

I don't terribly mind if it's 435 or 436. People pointed out you might
even renumber yourself if something makes more sense to you.

Christian