Re: deconflicting new syscall numbers for 6.11

[Linus Torvalds]

On Thu, 4 Jul 2024 at 11:46, Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> I addressed this in the cover letter:
>
> | How do we rectify this? By putting a safe implementation of getrandom()
> | in the vDSO, which has access to whatever information a
> | particular iteration of random.c is using to make its decisions. I use
> | that careful language of "particular iteration of random.c", because the
> | set of things that a vDSO getrandom() implementation might need for making
> | decisions as good as the kernel's will likely change over time.

Jason. This smells. It's BS.

Christ, let's make a deal: do a five-liner patch that adds the
generation number to the vdso data, and basically document it as a
"the kernel thinks you need to reseed your buffers using getrandom"
flag.

And *if* it turns out in the future that there is then any major
reason why that doesn't work, I'll take the 1000+ line thing, ok?

Deal?

                    Linus