[lkml]   [2019]   [Sep]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH glibc 2.31 1/5] glibc: Perform rseq(2) registration at C startup and thread creation (v12)
On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 09:54:23PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Carlos O'Donell:
> > On 9/11/19 3:08 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> >> * Carlos O'Donell:
> >>
> >>> It would be easier to merge the patch set if it were just an unconditional
> >>> registration like we do for set_robust_list().
> >>
> >> Note that this depends on the in-tree system call numbers list, which I
> >> still need to finish according to Joseph's specifications.
> >
> > Which work is this? Do you have a URL reference to WIP?
> <>
> <>
> I think realistically this is needed for the Y2038 work as well if we
> want to support building glibc with older kernel headers. “glibc 2..31
> will have Y2038 support and rseq support, but only if it runs on a
> current and it happens to have been built against sufficiently recent
> kernel headers” is a bit difficult to explain. The current kernel part
> is easy enough to understand, but the impact of the kernel headers on
> the feature set has always been tough to explain. Especially if you
> factor in vendor kernels with system call backports.

I'm in favor of in-tree syscall numbers list. If you don't want O(n)
per-arch work, though, you could just define the 'base number' for
each arch and use the fact that all the new syscalls share a common
numbering (i.e. base + constant depending only on syscall). I think
including the list with glibc is more robust though, and would
eliminate the need to check for definitions of older (pre-unification)
syscalls glibc wants to use.


 \ /
  Last update: 2019-09-11 22:09    [W:0.087 / U:2.028 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site