From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C61F1C04EB8 for ; Fri, 30 Nov 2018 23:15:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88DDE20863 for ; Fri, 30 Nov 2018 23:15:29 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 88DDE20863 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=arndb.de Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726618AbeLAK0W (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Dec 2018 05:26:22 -0500 Received: from mail-qt1-f195.google.com ([209.85.160.195]:43801 "EHLO mail-qt1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725790AbeLAK0V (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Dec 2018 05:26:21 -0500 Received: by mail-qt1-f195.google.com with SMTP id i7so7776579qtj.10; Fri, 30 Nov 2018 15:15:27 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=XkSNgAo+H7Jozc4gFZfunSW1trvE5ym2eJgraeDyBvw=; b=H+ll32GZ9E6OkU5xfYnOipT39i+QvfW4WWwuosVMzi2uJqvHuHmr2wVNcQWIfa46rq /0FdQFdUWjJ75a21mKXTsvmn9VLJkJBso4k6DH9+pr1a97lIFyGUcLAO64tI0NvWYFAb B0TdMkk/Dr7gWChHK2k59cY5uE/I9/yum8NzTWXW8ckoWYu4Z4L8oRU9d8xrPkXCHkpC 6jIVVHPrV0Oy8nmq4gPRavoqgL6WLzFIgNfk9/k7Emg2J0C6jLWW5OXnlyp0IOjtobxV oqcD7+rjVBkJr89K3+zHMt07vn70xpjFQIm3qZjrWTXbfZTEa6hOnXtKH9W6Tm745JlO qJWw== X-Gm-Message-State: AA+aEWYdEEbn355XRvQUbt1NLoeUrrOohSB3HMqdKn1tx+2Jfidz53Mo 7X5dQq3y9O+wxB2R5WDcTP7xGFyR204Z7Ur+Vog= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/WRuIsgynrOx9n2/uJAj0k7uAi53PXSqdNi+5cfLu2qDF6BCXWklGzzANzKwqBptMHMfWDxydAzT/9NlUYDcSc= X-Received: by 2002:a0c:d992:: with SMTP id y18mr7624613qvj.161.1543619726628; Fri, 30 Nov 2018 15:15:26 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20181120105124.14733-1-christian@brauner.io> <87in0g5aqo.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <36323361-90BD-41AF-AB5B-EE0D7BA02C21@amacapital.net> <993B98AC-51DF-4131-AF7F-7DA2A7F485F1@brauner.io> <20181129195551.woe2bl3z3yaysqb6@brauner.io> <6E21165F-2C76-4877-ABD9-0C86D55FD6AA@amacapital.net> <87y39b2lm2.fsf@xmission.com> <20181130065606.kmilbbq46oeycjp5@brauner.io> In-Reply-To: From: Arnd Bergmann Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2018 00:15:08 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] signal: add procfd_signal() syscall To: Daniel Colascione Cc: christian@brauner.io, Andy Lutomirski , "Eric W . Biederman" , Florian Weimer , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "Serge E. Hallyn" , Jann Horn , Andrew Morton , Oleg Nesterov , cyphar@cyphar.com, Al Viro , Linux FS-devel Mailing List , Linux API , Tim Murray , linux-man@vger.kernel.org, Kees Cook Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Dec 1, 2018 at 12:12 AM Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 1, 2018 at 12:05 AM Daniel Colascione wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 2:26 PM Christian Brauner wrote: > > > On December 1, 2018 11:09:58 AM GMT+13:00, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > > > > One humble point I would like to make is that what I care about most is a sensible way forward without having to redo essential parts of how syscalls work. > > > I don't want to introduce a sane, small syscall that ends up breaking all over the place because we decided to fix past mistakes that technically have nothing to do with the patch itself. > > > However, I do sympathize and understand these concerns. > > > > IMHO, it's fine to just replicate all the splits we have for the > > existing signal system calls. It's ugly, but once it's done, it'll be > > done for a long time. I can't see a need to add even more signal > > system calls after this one. > > We definitely need waitid_time64() and rt_sigtimedwait_time64() > in the very near future. To clarify: we probably don't need rt_sigtimedwait_time64() for x32, as it already has a 64-bit time_t. We might need waitid_time64() or something similar though, since the plan now is to change the time resolution for rusage to nanoseconds (__kernel_timespec) now. The exact behavior and name of waitid_time64() is still a matter of discussion. Arnd