| 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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 18:03:53 +0200 From: "Michael Kerrisk" <mtk.manpages@...il.com> To: "David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net> Cc: torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, drepper@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] alternative to sys_indirect, part 1 On 4/24/08, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote: > From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> > Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 08:29:14 -0700 (PDT) > > > > > > > > On Thu, 24 Apr 2008, Alan Cox wrote: > > > > > > Given we will never have 2^32 socket types, and in a sense this is part > > > of the type why not just use > > > > > > socket(PF_INET, SOCK_STREAM|SOCK_CLOEXEC, ...) > > > > Ok, I have to admit that I find this very appealing. It looks much > > cleaner, but perhaps more importantly, it also looks both readable _and_ > > easier to use for the user-space programmer. > > > Me too. But this approach fixes just one of the interfaces. There are 7 or 8 other interfaces that need to solve the same problem. What about those? It strikes me to be cleanest to use the same solution for all of them -- i.e., new syscalls (seems simplest) or sys_indirect() -- including socket(). -- I'll likely only see replies if they are CCed to mtk.manpages at gmail dot com -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists