linux-kernel - Re: Have RESOLVE_* flags superseded AT

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <3607683.1583419401@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date:   Thu, 05 Mar 2020 14:43:21 +0000
From:   David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To:     Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>
Cc:     dhowells@...hat.com,
        Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>,
        linux-api@...r.kernel.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
        metze@...ba.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, cyphar@...har.com,
        sfrench@...ba.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Have RESOLVE_* flags superseded AT_* flags for new syscalls?

Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com> wrote:

> But will those be O_ flags that need to be passed to openat?

Ah, sorry, you were talking about openat().  I doubt there's sufficient O_*
space for that.

David