Re: [PATCH, RFC] random: introduce getrandom(2) system call

[Bob Beck]

Or perhaps to put that another way, since you don't do minherit -
maybe a FORK_ZERO for madvise? or a similar way
to do that?


On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Bob Beck <beck@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> And thanks btw.
>
> I don't suppose you guys know who we should talk to about possibly
> getting MAP_INHERIT_ZERO minherit() support?
>
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 11:45 AM, Bob Beck <beck@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> we have diffs pending that will do the syscall method until we start
>> to see it in libc :)
>>
>> So basically we're going to put that in right away :)
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 11:34 AM, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 11:05:01AM -0600, Bob Beck wrote:
>>>> Hi Ted, yeah I understand the reasoning, it would be good if there was
>>>> a way to influence the various libc people to
>>>> ensure they manage to provide a getentropy().
>>>
>>> I don't anticipate that to be a problem.  And before they do, and/or
>>> if you are dealing with a system where the kernel has been upgraded,
>>> but not libc, you have your choice of either sticking with the
>>> binary_sysctl approach, or calling getrandom directly using the
>>> syscall method; and in that case, whether we use getrandom() or
>>> provide an exact getentropy() replacement system call isn't that much
>>> difference, since you'd have to have Linux-specific workaround code
>>> anyway....
>>>
>>>                                 - Ted
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/