[lkml]   [2002]   [Jul]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: more thoughts on a new jail() system call
On Thu, 2002-07-18 at 23:06, Albert D. Cahalan wrote:
> >> sys_vhangup) NOT SURE - Should be fine, right?
> >
> > Seems ok to me.
> Have fun with devpts.

can you expand on why this might be a problem, as far I can tell the
syscall is in fs/open.c

it seems very simple to me

asmlinkage long sys_vhangup(void)
if (capable(CAP_SYS_TTY_CONFIG)) {
return 0;
return -EPERM;

basically, we call tty_vhangup on the process's tty.

if tty_vhangup was the syscall, I could see this being a problem, but as
sys_vhangup can only operate on the what the task_struct has, how is it
a problem?


shaya potter

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:27    [W:0.055 / U:3.276 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site