Thread (28 messages) 28 messages, 8 authors, 2017-01-12

[Question] New mmap64 syscall?

From: Pavel Machek <hidden>
Date: 2017-01-12 21:51:33
Also in: linux-arch, lkml

On Thu 2017-01-12 17:13:25, Florian Weimer wrote:
On 01/03/2017 09:54 PM, Pavel Machek wrote:
quoted
...actually, with strace and batched interface, it will be impossible
to see what is going on because of races. So I'm not sure if I like
the batched interface at all...
I'm not sure if I understand this problem.

ioctl, fcntl, most socket system calls, even open all have this problem as
well, right?
Yes, ioctl() and similar are problematic. Still it is possible to
implement secure sandbox using ptrace. Dealing with indirect mmap()
would difficult AFAICT.

									Pavel

-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20170112/d730fd12/attachment-0001.sig>
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help