From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@suse.de>
Cc: David Daney <ddaney@caviumnetworks.com>,
Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@sophos.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.36-rc7
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2010 14:59:36 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CAF9448.7070906@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201010082350.01135.agruen@suse.de>
On 10/08/2010 02:50 PM, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> On Friday 08 October 2010 18:33:55 David Daney wrote:
>> On 10/08/2010 05:06 AM, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
>>> On Thursday 07 October 2010 19:49:28 Eric Paris wrote:
>>>> The safest thing would probably be to punt the syscalls to 2.6.37.
>>>> Which is sad since I know a number of people are already working against
>>>> them, but maybe that proves it's the best approach?
>>>
>>> I agree with removing the syscalls from 2.6.36 because of the following
>>> reasons:
>>
>> How would the mechanics of this be achieved?
>>
>> Is it enough to just unconditionally return -ENOSYS from the sys_*()
>> functions? Or should all the patches be reverted?
>
> Whatever works I guess ... they would get reactivated pretty soon, anyway.
>
Returning -ENOSYS should be sufficient (that's what a non-system-call
does); it would *also* be good to block any headers from getting
exported to userspace so people don't end up with compiling against the
wrong version of the kernel headers and then wonder why their code
doesn't work in the future.
-hpa
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-10-08 22:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <AANLkTi=LsBNU+O2hqZUcM2nYM_ze6qPq3thwSZBMtY_v@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <20101007190741.2dc62626@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
[not found] ` <1286473768.2656.21.camel@dhcp231-98.rdu.redhat.com>
2010-10-08 12:06 ` Linux 2.6.36-rc7 Andreas Gruenbacher
2010-10-08 16:33 ` David Daney
2010-10-08 21:50 ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2010-10-08 21:59 ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2010-10-11 22:13 ` fanotify: disable fanotify syscalls Eric Paris
2010-10-08 16:38 ` Linux 2.6.36-rc7 Eric Paris
2010-10-08 21:45 ` Andreas Gruenbacher
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4CAF9448.7070906@zytor.com \
--to=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=agruen@suse.de \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=ddaney@caviumnetworks.com \
--cc=eparis@redhat.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=tvrtko.ursulin@sophos.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).