From: Torvald Riegel <triegel@redhat.com>
To: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
Cc: GNU C Library <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] getrandom system call wrapper [BZ #17252]
Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2016 14:21:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1473430905.30192.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <661db778-8110-82b2-2c41-d6195916cbea@redhat.com>
On Thu, 2016-09-08 at 13:44 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> I have made the system call wrapper a cancellation point. (If we
> implement the simpler getentropy interface, it would not be a
> cancellation point.)
Why did you do that? Even though the system call is new, and thus can't
have been used in existing code directly, making it a cancellation point
will make all callers cancellation points too. Therefore, for example,
we couldn't use it in the implementation of any POSIX functions (that
are not cancellation points) in glibc without having to disable and
restore the cancellation state around it every time.
It might be even more convenient to have one wrapper that is a
cancellation point and one that is not.
Can't we just let cancellation rot in its corner?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-09 14:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-09-08 11:44 Florian Weimer
2016-09-08 12:46 ` Florian Weimer
2016-09-09 1:54 ` Rical Jasan
2016-09-08 13:01 ` Andreas Schwab
2016-09-08 13:02 ` Florian Weimer
2016-09-08 13:19 ` Andreas Schwab
2016-09-08 13:26 ` Florian Weimer
2016-09-08 13:37 ` Andreas Schwab
2016-09-08 13:49 ` Florian Weimer
2016-09-08 13:54 ` Andreas Schwab
2016-09-08 14:02 ` Florian Weimer
2016-09-08 15:56 ` Andreas Schwab
2016-09-08 14:19 ` Zack Weinberg
2016-09-08 14:31 ` Florian Weimer
2016-09-08 14:39 ` Zack Weinberg
2016-09-08 14:40 ` Florian Weimer
2016-09-08 15:10 ` Zack Weinberg
2016-09-08 18:28 ` Richard Henderson
2016-09-08 18:32 ` Florian Weimer
2016-09-08 18:35 ` Richard Henderson
2016-09-12 13:48 ` Florian Weimer
2016-10-07 23:00 ` Paul Eggert
2016-10-08 10:33 ` Florian Weimer
2016-10-08 10:49 ` Andreas Schwab
2016-10-08 12:31 ` Florian Weimer
2016-09-09 14:21 ` Torvald Riegel [this message]
2016-09-09 14:28 ` Florian Weimer
2016-09-09 14:41 ` Zack Weinberg
2016-09-09 15:14 ` Florian Weimer
2016-09-09 15:23 ` Torvald Riegel
2016-09-12 7:26 ` Florian Weimer
2016-09-12 9:40 ` Torvald Riegel
2016-09-12 11:52 ` Florian Weimer
2016-09-23 9:44 ` Torvald Riegel
2016-09-23 11:04 ` Florian Weimer
2016-10-12 15:58 ` Florian Weimer
2016-10-12 16:10 ` Zack Weinberg
2016-10-17 13:02 ` Florian Weimer
2016-10-17 13:07 ` Zack Weinberg
2016-10-17 12:54 ` Torvald Riegel
2016-10-17 13:01 ` Florian Weimer
2016-10-03 17:51 ` Carlos O'Donell
2016-10-04 12:02 ` Florian Weimer
2016-10-04 12:24 ` Adhemerval Zanella
2016-10-04 16:05 ` Torvald Riegel
2016-10-04 20:31 ` Zack Weinberg
2016-10-05 7:18 ` Florian Weimer
2016-10-05 12:42 ` Zack Weinberg
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1473430905.30192.5.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=triegel@redhat.com \
--cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).