linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] tools/nolibc: add support for uname(2)

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: <03d78f65-c753-4e03-8079-d9ad5a6da125@t-8ch.de>
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2024 20:36:57 +0200
From: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@...ssschuh.net>
To: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tools/nolibc: add support for uname(2)

Hi Willy!

On 2024-04-14 12:56:46+0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 14, 2024 at 09:56:23AM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> > All supported kernels are assumed to use struct new_utsname.
> > This is validated in test_uname().
> > 
> > uname(2) can for example be used in ksft_min_kernel_version() from the
> > kernels selftest framework.
> > 
> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240412123536.GA32444@redhat.com/
> 
> I find it really annoying when other developers waste time trying to
> work around some missing trivial syscalls. I would have bet we already
> had this one, but obviously not.

It's a bit annoying to validate that it works given the fact there are
the structs new_utsname, old_utsname and oldold_utsname...

> That's obviously an ack by me: Acked-by: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>

Thanks, pushed to nolibc/next.
(With a tiny change to skip the testcase if procfs is not available.

Thomas