[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191127170644.GB26180@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2019 18:06:44 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@...hat.com>,
Pedro Alves <palves@...hat.com>, Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ptrace/x86: introduce TS_COMPAT_RESTART to fix
get_nr_restart_syscall()
On 11/26, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>
> How about we rename restart_block::fn to __fn,
Oh, please no. We can do this later, this needs to update every arch/
> add fields
> restart_syscall_nr and restart_syscall_arch,
Hmm, why do we nedd 2 fields ?
and do:
> IMO the ideal solution would be to add a new syscall nr to restart a
> syscall and make it the same on all architectures.
Damn yes! And I tried to suggest this 2 years ago. But
> This has
> unfortunate interactions with seccomp, though.
Yes. Do you think we can do something with seccomp?
Oleg.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists