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: <CAFki+Lnso5j+cbDsd74+YM+-sT-zTYuymyJLY2Sw1ho3SHW74Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 1 Sep 2021 09:11:56 -0400
From:   Nitesh Lal <nilal@...hat.com>
To:     Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Nicolas Saenz Julienne <nsaenzju@...hat.com>,
        Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
        Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Alex Belits <abelits@...its.com>, Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [patch V3 2/8] add prctl task isolation prctl docs and samples

On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 11:42 AM Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> Add documentation and userspace sample code for prctl
> task isolation interface.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>
>
> ---
>  Documentation/userspace-api/task_isolation.rst |  211 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  samples/Kconfig                                |    7
>  samples/Makefile                               |    1
>  samples/task_isolation/Makefile                |    9 +
>  samples/task_isolation/task_isol.c             |   83 +++++++++
>  samples/task_isolation/task_isol.h             |    9 +
>  samples/task_isolation/task_isol_userloop.c    |   56 ++++++
>  7 files changed, 376 insertions(+)

[...]

> +       if (ret) {
> +               perror("mlock");
> +               return EXIT_FAILURE;
> +       }
> +
> +       ret = task_isol_setup();
> +       if (ret)
> +               return EXIT_FAILURE;

The above check condition should be 'ret == -1', isn't it?

-- 
Thanks
Nitesh

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ