Re: [PATCH v4 0/2] Syscall User Redirection

From: Carlos O'Donell <carlos@redhat.com>
To: Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman@collabora.com>,
	Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
	Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
	tglx@linutronix.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kernel@collabora.com, gofmanp@gmail.com,
	linux-api@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
	linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, shuah@kernel.org,
	jannh@google.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/2] Syscall User Redirection
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2020 17:06:14 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <d0d8b5aa-757e-4306-5558-0f448db69445@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <871rlbjj7r.fsf@collabora.com>

On 7/16/20 4:30 PM, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi wrote:
> Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com> writes:
> 
>> On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 01:25:43PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 10:22:34PM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 01:04:38PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 03:31:39PM -0400, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi wrote:
>>>>>> This is v4 of Syscall User Redirection.  The implementation itself is
>>>>>> not modified from v3, it only applies the latest round of reviews to the
>>>>>> selftests.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> __NR_syscalls is not really exported in header files other than
>>>>>> asm-generic for every architecture, so it felt safer to optionally
>>>>>> expose it with a fallback to a high value.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, I didn't expose tests for PR_GET as that is not currently
>>>>>> implemented.  If possible, I'd have it supported by a future patchset,
>>>>>> since it is not immediately necessary to support this feature.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks! That all looks good to me.
>>>>
>>>> Don't have any problem with this but did this ever get exposure on
>>>> linux-api? This is the first time I see this pop up.
>>>
>>> I thought I'd added it to CC in the past, but that might have been other
>>> recent unrelated threads. Does this need a full repost there too, you
>>> think?
>>
>> Nah, wasn't my intention to force a repost. Seems that several people
>> have looked this over. :) Just curious why it didn't get to linux-api
>> and we know quite some people who only do look at linux-api (for sanity). :)
> 
> That's my mistake.  I didn't think about it when submitting :(
> 
> If this get re-spinned again I will make sure to CC linux-api.

Thank you! It helps C library implementors stay up to date and comment
on changes that impact userspace ABIs and APIs. This patch set was new
to me. Interesting new feature.

-- 
Cheers,
Carlos.