* Laurent Vivier:
Le 06/03/2020 à 09:13, Florian Weimer a écrit :
quoted
* YunQiang Su:
quoted
+ if (bprm->interp_flags & BINPRM_FLAGS_PRESERVE_ARGV0)
+ flags |= AT_FLAGS_PRESERVE_ARGV0;
+ NEW_AUX_ENT(AT_FLAGS, flags);
Is it necessary to reuse AT_FLAGS? I think it's cleaner to define a
separate AT_ tag dedicated to binfmt_misc.
Not necessary, but it seemed simpler and cleaner to re-use a flag that
is marked as unused and with a name matching the new role. It avoids to
patch other packages (like glibc) to add it as it is already defined.
You still need to define AT_FLAGS_PRESERVE_ARGV0. At that point, you
might as well define AT_BINFMT and AT_BINFMT_PRESERVE_ARGV0.
Le 06/03/2020 à 09:37, Florian Weimer a écrit :
* Laurent Vivier:
quoted
Le 06/03/2020 à 09:13, Florian Weimer a écrit :
quoted
* YunQiang Su:
quoted
+ if (bprm->interp_flags & BINPRM_FLAGS_PRESERVE_ARGV0)
+ flags |= AT_FLAGS_PRESERVE_ARGV0;
+ NEW_AUX_ENT(AT_FLAGS, flags);
Is it necessary to reuse AT_FLAGS? I think it's cleaner to define a
separate AT_ tag dedicated to binfmt_misc.
Not necessary, but it seemed simpler and cleaner to re-use a flag that
is marked as unused and with a name matching the new role. It avoids to
patch other packages (like glibc) to add it as it is already defined.
You still need to define AT_FLAGS_PRESERVE_ARGV0. At that point, you
might as well define AT_BINFMT and AT_BINFMT_PRESERVE_ARGV0.
Yes, you're right.
But is there any reason to not reuse AT_FLAGS?
Thanks,
Laurent
Laurent Vivier [off-list ref] 于2020年3月6日周五 下午7:13写道：
Le 06/03/2020 à 09:37, Florian Weimer a écrit :
quoted
* Laurent Vivier:
quoted
Le 06/03/2020 à 09:13, Florian Weimer a écrit :
quoted
* YunQiang Su:
quoted
+ if (bprm->interp_flags & BINPRM_FLAGS_PRESERVE_ARGV0)
+ flags |= AT_FLAGS_PRESERVE_ARGV0;
+ NEW_AUX_ENT(AT_FLAGS, flags);
Is it necessary to reuse AT_FLAGS? I think it's cleaner to define a
separate AT_ tag dedicated to binfmt_misc.
Not necessary, but it seemed simpler and cleaner to re-use a flag that
is marked as unused and with a name matching the new role. It avoids to
patch other packages (like glibc) to add it as it is already defined.
You still need to define AT_FLAGS_PRESERVE_ARGV0. At that point, you
might as well define AT_BINFMT and AT_BINFMT_PRESERVE_ARGV0.
Yes, you're right.
But is there any reason to not reuse AT_FLAGS?
AT_* only has 32 slot and now. I was afraid that maybe we shouldn't take one.
/* AT_* values 18 through 22 are reserved */
27,28,29,30 are not used now.
Which should we use?
Thanks,
Laurent