lkml.org 
[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
    From
    Date
    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)) {
    tty_vhangup(current->tty);
    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?

    thanks,

    shaya potter

    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:27    [W:0.023 / U:29.728 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site