Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 6 Jan 2015 22:39:00 +0100 | From | Andi Kleen <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 3.19 3/3] x86, mpx: Change the MPX enable/disable API to arch_prctl |
| |
On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 01:34:56PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> wrote: > >> Given that it doesn't seen to have been committed yet, I'm not too > >> worried about compatibility. And "prctl (43)" doesn't actually seem a > >> whole lot better than "syscall(SYS_arch_prctl, ARCH_ENABLE_MPX, 0)" > > > > This would actually fail with the EINVAL change you requested. > > > > So the libmpx code needs to change anyway, then, right? I really > don't think we should accept garbage in the extra prctl slots just > because uncommitted code somewhere fails to initialize them.
Yes it would.
I think that is why most prctls don't do it. After all if you need a new field you can just add another one. I usually added the checks in the ones I added, but I can see why not doing it.
-Andi
| |