netdev - Re: [PATCH v4 0/7] kernel tinification: optionally compile out splice family of syscalls (splice, vmsplice, tee and sendfile)

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: <20141125181032.GJ5050@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:	Tue, 25 Nov 2014 10:10:32 -0800
From:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	rdunlap@...radead.org, pieter@...sman.nl, josh@...htriplett.org,
	alexander.h.duyck@...el.com, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
	ast@...mgrid.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, beber@...eeweb.net,
	catalina.mocanu@...il.com, dborkman@...hat.com,
	edumazet@...gle.com, ebiederm@...ssion.com, fabf@...net.be,
	fuse-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, geert@...ux-m68k.org,
	hughd@...gle.com, iulia.manda21@...il.com, JBeulich@...e.com,
	bfields@...ldses.org, jlayton@...chiereds.net,
	linux-api@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org,
	mcgrof@...e.com, mattst88@...il.com, mgorman@...e.de,
	mst@...hat.com, miklos@...redi.hu, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	oleg@...hat.com, Paul.Durrant@...rix.com, pefoley2@...oley.com,
	tgraf@...g.ch, therbert@...gle.com,
	trond.myklebust@...marydata.com, willemb@...gle.com,
	xiaoguangrong@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, zhenglong.cai@...c.com.cn
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/7] kernel tinification: optionally compile out
 splice family of syscalls (splice, vmsplice, tee and sendfile)

On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 12:13:05PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
> From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
> Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 08:17:58 -0800
> 
> > Is the splice family of syscalls the only one that tiny has identified
> > for optional building or can we expect similar treatment for other
> > syscalls?
> > 
> > Why will many embedded systems not need these syscalls?  You know
> > exactly what apps they run and you are positive that those apps do
> > not use splice?
> 
> I think starting to compile out system calls is a very slippery
> slope we should not begin the journey down.
> 
> This changes the forward facing interface to userspace.

I certainly sympathize with this concern, given the importance of software
portability.  However, the tiny-hardware alternative appears ot some sort
of special-purpose embedded OS, which most definitely will suffer from
software compatibility issues.  I guess that the good news is that much
of the tiny hardware that used to be 8 or 16 bits is now 32 bits, which
means that it has at least some chance of running some form of Linux.  ;-)

							Thanx, Paul

--
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