Re: [PATCH 3.19 3/3] x86, mpx: Change the MPX enable/disable API to arch_prctl

[Andi Kleen]

On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 01:34:56PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Andi Kleen <andi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> Given that it doesn't seen to have been committed yet, I'm not too
> >> worried about compatibility.  And "prctl (43)" doesn't actually seem a
> >> whole lot better than "syscall(SYS_arch_prctl, ARCH_ENABLE_MPX, 0)"
> >
> > This would actually fail with the EINVAL change you requested.
> >
> 
> So the libmpx code needs to change anyway, then, right?  I really
> don't think we should accept garbage in the extra prctl slots just
> because uncommitted code somewhere fails to initialize them.

Yes it would.

I think that is why most prctls don't do it. After all if you need a new
field you can just add another one. I usually added the checks in the
ones I added, but I can see why not doing it.

-Andi
--
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/