linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v13 2/3] cachestat: implement cachestat 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:   Fri, 5 May 2023 13:34:26 -0700
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc:     Nhat Pham <nphamcs@...il.com>, hannes@...xchg.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        bfoster@...hat.com, willy@...radead.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel-team@...a.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 2/3] cachestat: implement cachestat syscall

On Thu, 4 May 2023 19:26:11 +0200 Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:

> >  arch/x86/entry/syscalls/syscall_32.tbl |   1 +
> >  arch/x86/entry/syscalls/syscall_64.tbl |   1 +
> 
> This should be wired up on each and every architecture.
> Currently we're getting
> 
>     <stdin>:1567:2: warning: #warning syscall cachestat not implemented [-Wcpp]
> 
> in linux-next for all the missing architectures.

Is that wise?  We risk adding a syscall to an architecture without the
arch maintainers and testers even knowing about it.

The compile-time nag is there to inform the arch maintainers that a new
syscall is available and that they should wire it up, run the selftest
and then ship the code if they're happy with the result.