From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCHv7 0/3] syscalls,x86: Add execveat() system call Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 13:50:09 -0800 Message-ID: <20141112135009.5a887d200be262d94ba50495@linux-foundation.org> References: <1415379664-31555-1-git-send-email-drysdale@google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:49426 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752798AbaKLVuM (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Nov 2014 16:50:12 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1415379664-31555-1-git-send-email-drysdale@google.com> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: David Drysdale Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" , Andy Lutomirski , Alexander Viro , Meredydd Luff , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , Kees Cook , Arnd Bergmann , Rich Felker , Christoph Hellwig , x86@kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 7 Nov 2014 17:01:01 +0000 David Drysdale wrote: > This patch set adds execveat(2) for x86, and is derived from Meredydd > Luff's patch from Sept 2012 (https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/9/11/528). > > The primary aim of adding an execveat syscall is to allow an > implementation of fexecve(3) that does not rely on the /proc > filesystem, at least for executables (rather than scripts). The > current glibc version of fexecve(3) is implemented via /proc, which > causes problems in sandboxed or otherwise restricted environments. Have the relevant glibc people seen/reviewed/liked this?