linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/4] tools/nolibc: automatically detect necessity to use pselect6

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: <20230917030733.GG9646@1wt.eu>
Date:   Sun, 17 Sep 2023 05:07:33 +0200
From:   Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
To:     Thomas Weißschuh <linux@...ssschuh.net>
Cc:     Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] tools/nolibc: automatically detect necessity to use
 pselect6

On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 06:01:20PM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> We can automatically detect if pselect6 is needed or not from the kernel
> headers. This removes the need to manually specify it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@...ssschuh.net>

That's indeed cleaner, I can't find the reason why we didn't do it
like this initially, I suspect that maybe we were having __NR_select
defined but not usable, I don't know. I've found it first introduced with
nolibc commit 28a7178 ("nolibc: fall back to pselect6() on aarch64"), and
the test was made before __NR_newselect, so maybe I wanted to be sure not
to use pselect6() in case another arch would define it.

Let's do as you propose, it's much cleaner and simpler. If we ever find
any breakage at least we'll know how to deal with it so I'm not worried.

Acked-by: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>

Thanks!
Willy