From: Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>
To: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
Cc: Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org>,
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [GLIBC RFC] clone3: add CLONE3_RESET_SIGHAND
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2019 11:12:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191009111200.rfqlk5lgityhi6rl@wittgenstein> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87bluq18po.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com>
On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 01:04:03PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Christian Brauner:
>
> > I've been thinking about two things how to do this:
> > - mask the flags that the kernel does not support
>
> That doesn't look fully backwards-compatible to me. The argument isn't
> currently read/write, is it? It would work for us though.
>
> > - add another argument to struct clone_args that is "known_flags"
> > when the syscall returns it'll be set to all the flags this kernel
> > knows about
>
> This needs some sort of protocol to detect whether the argument was
> updated. I suppose we could define CLONE3_INITIALLY_SUPPORTED_FLAGS
> with all the flag bits currently supported and tell developers to
> initialize struct clone_args with:
>
> .known_flags = CLONE3_INITIALLY_SUPPORTED_FLAGS,
That won't work. Older kernels will verify that parts of the struct that
are not known are set to 0.
I wonder, what is stopping you from
struct clone args args = {
.known_flags = 0,
};
pid_t pid = clone3(&args, sizeof(args));
if (pid < 0)
return -1;
######### kernel code ############
/* on a kernel that is aware of known_flags */
kargs->known_flags = CLONE3_SUPPORTED_FLAGS;
##################################
if (!args.known_flags)
/* kernel doesn't not support the known_flags extension */
if (args.known_flags & NEW_FLAG_I_CARE_ABOUT)
/*
* kernel does support the known_flags extension and does
* support the feature I care about
*/
>
> Then the result would be correct whether or not known_flags is supported
> by the kernel or not. This too would work fine for glibc internal use.
>
> By theway, I don't think we have a good userspace API story for
> extensible *output* arguments yet. Every system call does things a
> little bit differently there.
Yeah, I'm slowly pushing in this direction but you're right it is nasty
currently... Traditionally syscalls mix and match output arguments in a
single struct. I've honestly have seen now need for a separate output
struct for clone3(). But yeah, we should probably standardize this. We
should have a session somewhere or a mailing list discussion at least.
Though I'd prefer the in-person discussion.
Thanks!
Christian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-09 11:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-08 13:44 Christian Brauner
2019-10-08 14:14 ` Christian Brauner
2019-10-08 14:20 ` Adhemerval Zanella
2019-10-09 10:48 ` Christian Brauner
2019-10-09 11:04 ` Florian Weimer
2019-10-09 11:12 ` Christian Brauner [this message]
2019-10-09 11:56 ` Florian Weimer
2019-10-09 11:58 ` Christian Brauner
2019-10-09 12:01 ` Florian Weimer
2019-10-09 13:33 ` Christian Brauner
2019-10-10 10:51 ` Christian Brauner
2019-10-10 14:49 ` Florian Weimer
2019-10-11 10:47 ` Christian Brauner
2019-10-09 11:14 ` Dmitry V. Levin
2019-12-04 13:16 ` clone3: CLONE_CLEAR_SIGHAND v5.5 Christian Brauner
2019-12-04 13:45 ` Florian Weimer
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=20191009111200.rfqlk5lgityhi6rl@wittgenstein \
--to=christian.brauner@ubuntu.com \
--cc=adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org \
--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).