Or perhaps to put that another way, since you don't do minherit - maybe a FORK_ZERO for madvise? or a similar way to do that? On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Bob Beck <beck@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > And thanks btw. > > I don't suppose you guys know who we should talk to about possibly > getting MAP_INHERIT_ZERO minherit() support? > > On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 11:45 AM, Bob Beck <beck@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> we have diffs pending that will do the syscall method until we start >> to see it in libc :) >> >> So basically we're going to put that in right away :) >> >> On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 11:34 AM, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@xxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 11:05:01AM -0600, Bob Beck wrote: >>>> Hi Ted, yeah I understand the reasoning, it would be good if there was >>>> a way to influence the various libc people to >>>> ensure they manage to provide a getentropy(). >>> >>> I don't anticipate that to be a problem. And before they do, and/or >>> if you are dealing with a system where the kernel has been upgraded, >>> but not libc, you have your choice of either sticking with the >>> binary_sysctl approach, or calling getrandom directly using the >>> syscall method; and in that case, whether we use getrandom() or >>> provide an exact getentropy() replacement system call isn't that much >>> difference, since you'd have to have Linux-specific workaround code >>> anyway.... >>> >>> - Ted -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
