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

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 [off-list ref] 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 [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

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 [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 11:05:01AM -0600, Bob Beck wrote:

quoted

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