Hi Serge,
On 6 May 2016 at 19:33, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) (mtk.manpa...@gmail.com):
>> Hi Serge,
>>
>> I'll add my own notes below, as much as anything in order to convince
>> myself that I understand what's going on.
Hi Serge,
I'll add my own notes below, as much as anything in order to convince
myself that I understand what's going on.
On 05/05/2016 05:20 PM, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Short explanation:
>
> When showing a cgroupfs entry in mountinfo, show the path of the mount
> root dentry relative to the
On 05/02/2016 05:54 AM, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 03:39:54PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 3:26 PM, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
>>> Quoting Kees Cook (keesc...@chromium.org):
On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 10:26 AM, wrote:
> From: Serge Hallyn
> ...
On 04/01/2016 11:33 AM, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> From: David Gstir
>
> Implement the leftpad() system call such that userspace,
> especially node.js applications, can in the near future directly
> use it and no longer depend on fragile npm packages.
Works can't express the importance of addin
Gidday,
The Linux man-pages maintainer proudly announces:
man-pages-4.05 - man pages for Linux
This release includes input and contributions from
nearly 70 people. Over 400 pages saw changes, ranging
from typo fixes through to page rewrites and newly
created pages.
Tarball download:
htt
Hi Jason,
On 03/15/2016 11:35 AM, Jason Baron wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> On 03/14/2016 05:03 PM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> Hi Jason,
>>
>> On 03/15/2016 09:01 AM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>>> Hi Jason,
>>>
>>> On 03/15/201
Hi Jason,
On 03/15/2016 09:01 AM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> Hi Jason,
>
> On 03/15/2016 08:32 AM, Jason Baron wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 03/14/2016 01:47 PM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>>> [Restoring CC, which I see I accidentally dropped, one itera
Hi Jason,
On 03/15/2016 08:32 AM, Jason Baron wrote:
>
>
> On 03/14/2016 01:47 PM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> [Restoring CC, which I see I accidentally dropped, one iteration back.]
[...]
>>>> values in events yield an err
isk (man-pages) wrote:
>> On 03/11/2016 09:51 PM, Jason Baron wrote:
>>> On 03/11/2016 03:30 PM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
[...]
> Hi Michael,
>
> Looks good. One comment below.
>
> Thanks,
>
>>EPOLLEXCLUSIVE (since Linux 4.5)
>>
>> By the way, in the code you have
>>
>> case EPOLL_CTL_MOD:
>> if (epi) {
>> if (!(epi->event.events & EPOLLEXCLUSIVE)) {
>> epds.events |= POLLERR | POLLHUP;
>> error = ep_modify(ep, e
On 03/10/2016 07:53 PM, Jason Baron wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> On 01/29/2016 03:14 AM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> Hello Jason,
>> On 01/28/2016 06:57 PM, Jason Baron wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 01/28/2016 02:16 AM, Michael Kerrisk (man-page
Hi Jason,
> Ok, here's some updated text:
>
> EPOLLEXCLUSIVE
>
> Sets an exclusive wakeup mode for the epfd file descriptor that is being
> attached to the target file descriptor, fd. When a wakeup event occurs
> and multiple epfd file descriptors are attached to the same target file
> using EPO
Hello John,
Following up, long after the fact
First of all, a belated thanks for your comments.
On 01/09/2015 11:51 PM, John Stultz wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 4:53 AM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
> wrote:
>> Hello all,
>>
>> Recently, I made made a number of c
Hi Dave,
On 23 February 2016 at 02:11, Dave Hansen wrote:
> As promised, here are the proposed new Memory Protection Keys
> interfaces. These interfaces make it possible to do something
> with pkeys other than execute-only support.
>
> There are 5 syscalls here. I'm hoping for reviews of this s
Hi David,
On 02/29/2016 10:22 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Feb 2016, Michael Kerrisk wrote:
>
>> Linux also updates sempid for SETVAL operations and semaphore
>> adjustments. However, somewhat inconsistently, it does not
>> update sempid for SETALL operations.
Hi Andreas,
On 02/22/2016 03:46 PM, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 10:40 PM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
> wrote:
>> I've once more pulled from the latest git; here's some more comments.
>
> thanks again. I've up
Hi Andreas,
On 02/22/2016 03:46 PM, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 10:40 PM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
> wrote:
>> I've once more pulled from the latest git; here's some more comments.
>
> thanks again. I've upda
Hello Andreas,
On 02/20/2016 05:37 PM, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> thanks again for all the feedback. I've followed all your suggestions;
> again, please see the github repo for the latest version:
>
> https://github.com/andreas-gruenbacher/richacl
I've once more pulled from
Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 10:31 PM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
> wrote:
>> Hi Andreas,
>>
>> Here's a few more comments on the current richacl(7) page
>> that I fetched from the git repo.
>>
[...]
>>> .HP
>>> .BR dir_inherit "\ (" d ):
&g
On 15 February 2016 at 12:35, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 11:25 AM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
> wrote:
>> You're right. I was confusing with xattr(7). So, I think it might
>> make some sense to eventually move both of these into man-pages (for
Hi Andreas,
On 02/15/2016 12:12 AM, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 10:27 PM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
> wrote:
>> On 02/12/2016 11:25 PM, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
>>> We could sure move acl(5) and richacl(7) there.
>>
>> We already
Hi Andreas,
Here's a few more comments on the current richacl(7) page
that I fetched from the git repo.
> .\"
> .\" RichACL Manual Pages
> .\"
> .\" Copyright (C) 2015,2016 Red Hat, Inc.
> .\" Written by Andreas Gruenbacher
> .\" This is free documentation; you can redistribute it and/or
> .\"
Hi Andreas,
Here's a few more comments on the current getrichacl(1) page
that I fetched from the git repo.
> .\"
> .\" RichACL Manual Pages
> .\"
> .\" Copyright (C) 2015,2016 Red Hat, Inc.
> .\" Written by Andreas Gruenbacher
> .\" This is free documentation; you can redistribute it and/or
> .
Hi Andreas,
Here's a few more comments on the latest setrichacl(1)
page that I pulled out of the git repo.
> .\"
> .\" RichACL Manual Pages
> .\"
> .\" Copyright (C) 2015,2016 Red Hat, Inc.
> .\" Written by Andreas Gruenbacher
> .\" This is free documentation; you can redistribute it and/or
> .
On 02/12/2016 11:25 PM, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 5:35 PM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
> wrote:
>> Hi Andreas,
>>
>> I'll probably have quite a few more comments on this page as I get to
>> understand RichACLs bet
Hello Andreas,
Here, some comments on the setrichacl(1) page.
> .\"
> .\" Richacl Manual Pages
> .\"
> .\" Copyright (C) 2015 Red Hat, Inc.
> .\" Written by Andreas Gruenbacher
> .\" This is free documentation; you can redistribute it and/or
> .\" modify it under the terms of the GNU General Pu
Hello Andreas,
Here, some comments on the setrichacl(1) page.
> .\"
> .\" Richacl Manual Pages
> .\"
> .\" Copyright (C) 2015 Red Hat, Inc.
> .\" Written by Andreas Gruenbacher
> .\" This is free documentation; you can redistribute it and/or
> .\" modify it under the terms of the GNU General Pu
Hello Andreas,
Here, some comments on the getrichacl(1) page.
> .\"
> .\" Richacl Manual Pages
> .\"
> .\" Copyright (C) 2015 Red Hat, Inc.
> .\" Written by Andreas Gruenbacher
> .\" This is free documentation; you can redistribute it and/or
> .\" modify it under the terms of the GNU General Pu
Hi Andreas,
I'll probably have quite a few more comments on this page as I get to
understand RichACLs better. Here's some comments from an initial
reading.
So, an initial comment. It seems to me to that this page (but
not setrichacl(1) and getrichacl(1)) should ultimately land in
man-pages (just
Hello Andreas
I've taken a look at the current drafts of the setrichacl(1),
getrichacl(1), and richacl(7) man pages, and will send comments
as separate following mails.
Cheers,
Michael
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Progra
Hello Minchan,
On 02/05/2016 03:15 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 08:16:25AM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> Hello Minchan,
>>
>> On 11/30/2015 07:39 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
>>> In v4, Andrew wanted to settle in old basic MADV_FREE an
Hi Shuah,
On 4 February 2016 at 15:35, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 02/04/2016 07:04 AM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> [expanding the CC a little]
>>
>> Hi Andy, (and Shuah)
>>
>> On 4 February 2016 at 05:51, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>> [cc list heavi
Hi Josh,
On 4 February 2016 at 16:34, Josh Triplett wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 04, 2016 at 03:05:19PM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> Josh Tripplett's commit ea8f8fc8631d9f890580a94d57a18bfeb827fa2e
>
> s/Tripplett/Triplett/
>
>> was well intentioned (I even
Josh Tripplett's commit ea8f8fc8631d9f890580a94d57a18bfeb827fa2e
was well intentioned (I even Acked it), but in practice it has mostly
generated (a lot of) useless noise on linux-api as developers of
drivers and implementers of other uninteresting changes run
scripts/get-maintainers.pl and unthinki
[expanding the CC a little]
Hi Andy, (and Shuah)
On 4 February 2016 at 05:51, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> [cc list heavily trimmed]
>
> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 8:03 PM, Shuah Khan wrote:
>> Change dvb frontend to check if tuner is free when
>> device opened in RW mode. Call to enable_source
>> hand
Hello Jason,
On 01/28/2016 06:57 PM, Jason Baron wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 01/28/2016 02:16 AM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> Hi Jason,
>>
>> On 12/08/2015 04:23 AM, Jason Baron wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Re-post of an old series addressing thun
Hello Minchan,
On 11/30/2015 07:39 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> In v4, Andrew wanted to settle in old basic MADV_FREE and introduces
> new stuffs(ie, lazyfree LRU, swapless support and lazyfreeness) later
> so this version doesn't include them.
>
> I have been tested it on mmotm-2015-11-25-17-08 with
Hi Jason,
On 12/08/2015 04:23 AM, Jason Baron wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Re-post of an old series addressing thundering herd issues when sharing
> an event source fd amongst multiple epoll fds. Last posting was here
> for reference: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/2/25/56
>
> The patch herein drops the core s
Hi Heinrich,
On 12/29/2015 11:22 PM, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
> IOCTL SIOCRTMSG does nothing but return EINVAL.
>
> So comment it as unused.
Can you say something about how you confirmed this?
It's not immediately obvious from the code.
Cheers,
Michael
> Signed-off-by: Heinrich Schuchardt
Gidday,
The Linux man-pages maintainer proudly announces:
man-pages-4.04 - man pages for Linux
This release includes input and contributions from
more than 30 people.
Tarball download:
http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/download.html
Git repository:
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/docs
Hi Dave,
On 12/14/2015 08:05 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> Memory Protection Keys for User pages is a CPU feature which will
> first appear on Skylake Servers, but will also be supported on
> future non-server parts (there is also a QEMU implementation). It
> provides a mechanism for enforcing page-ba
On 12/18/2015 12:21 PM, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-12-15 at 13:18 -0800, Darren Hart wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 02:43:50PM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>>>
>>>When executing a futex operation that requests to block a thread,
>&
On 12/18/2015 12:11 PM, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-12-16 at 16:54 +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> Hello Darren,
>>
>> On 12/15/2015 10:18 PM, Darren Hart wrote:
>>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 02:43:50PM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
&
Hello Darren,
On 12/15/2015 10:18 PM, Darren Hart wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 02:43:50PM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
[...]
>>When executing a futex operation that requests to block a thread,
>>the kernel will block only if the futex word has t
Hi David,
On 12/15/2015 11:41 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Dec 2015, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>
>> When executing a futex operation that requests to block a thread,
>> the kernel will block only if the futex word has the value that
>>
On 12/15/2015 07:54 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> One instance of "sys_membarrier" needs to be renamed to "membarrier" for
> consistency.
Thanks, Mathieu. Applied.
Cheers,
Michael
> Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers
> CC: Michael Kerrisk
> ---
> man2/membarrier.2 | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1
Hi Mathieu,
On 12/13/2015 02:17 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> [ Updated following feedback from Michael Kerrisk. Not sure what to put
> in SEE ALSO section ?
Maybe we think of something later.
> Also, the example uses the syscall() macro.
> Should we target this, or some API eventually e
Hello Torvald,
On 12/15/2015 04:34 PM, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-12-15 at 14:43 +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> Hello all,
>>
>> After much too long a time, the revised futex man page *will*
>> go out in the next man pages release (it has
Hello all,
After much too long a time, the revised futex man page *will*
go out in the next man pages release (it has been merged
into master).
There are various places where the page could still be improved,
but it is much better (and more than 5 times longer) than the
existing page.
The render
On 11/09/2015 07:27 PM, Eric B Munson wrote:
> Update the mlock.2 man page with information on mlock2() and the new
> mlockall() flag MCL_ONFAULT.
Hello Eric,
Thanks for the nicely written patch. I've applied.
Cheers,
Michael
> Signed-off-by: Eric B Munson
> Acked-by: Michal Hocko
> Acked-b
Hello Mathieu
On 12 December 2015 at 13:40, Mathieu Desnoyers
wrote:
> - On Dec 11, 2015, at 1:56 PM, Michael Kerrisk mtk.manpa...@gmail.com
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Mathieu,
>>
>> On 12/10/2015 04:39 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>>> Expose a new system call allowing threads to register a userspace
On 12/09/2015 06:05 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 12/09/2015 08:45 AM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>>>>>> * Explanation of what a protection domain is.
>>>>
>>>> A protection domain is a unique view of memory and is represented by the
>>&g
On 12/04/2015 05:12 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 7:08 AM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
> wrote:
>> Hi Andy,
>>
>> I have applied your patch (below). Thanks for writing it.
>> But I have a question or two and a request.
>>
>> ===
>
Hi Mathieu,
On 12/10/2015 04:39 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> Expose a new system call allowing threads to register a userspace memory
> area where to store the current CPU number. Scheduler migration sets the
> TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME flag on the current thread. Upon return to user-space,
> a notify-r
Hi Matthew,
On 12/05/2015 09:48 AM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> Please find the membarrier man groff file attached. I re-integrated
> some changes that went in initially only in the changelog text version
> back onto this groff source.
>
> Please let me know if you find any issue
Hi Dave,
On 9 December 2015 at 16:48, Dave Hansen wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> Thanks for all the comments! I'll fix most of it when I post a new
> version of the manpage, but I have a few general questions.
>
> On 12/09/2015 03:08 AM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>
Hi Dave,
On 7 December 2015 at 17:44, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 12/04/2015 10:50 PM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> On 12/04/2015 02:15 AM, Dave Hansen wrote:
>>> From: Dave Hansen
>>>
>>> mprotect_key() is just like mprotect, except it also takes a
&g
Gidday,
The Linux man-pages maintainer proudly announces:
man-pages-4.03 - man pages for Linux
This release includes input and contributions from
nearly 40 people.
Tarball download:
http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/download.html
Git repository:
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/docs/ma
Dave,
On 12/04/2015 02:15 AM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> From: Dave Hansen
>
> mprotect_key() is just like mprotect, except it also takes a
> protection key as an argument. On systems that do not support
> protection keys, it still works, but requires that key=0.
> Otherwise it does exactly what mpro
Hi Andrea,
On 09/11/2015 10:47 AM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> On 05/14/2015 07:30 PM, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
>> Add documentation.
>
> Hi Andrea,
>
> I do not recall... Did you write a man page also for this new system call?
No response to my last mail, so I&#x
Hi Mathieu,
In the patch below you have a man page type of text. Is that
just plain text, or do you have some groff source somewhere?
Thanks,
Michael
On 07/10/2015 10:58 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> Here is an implementation of a new system call, sys_membarrier(), which
> executes a memory b
Hi Andy,
I have applied your patch (below). Thanks for writing it.
But I have a question or two and a request.
===
In the capabilities(7) page tehre is the longstanding text:
An application can use the following call to lock itself, and
all of its descendants, into an environmen
On 07/23/2015 07:16 PM, Vince Weaver wrote:
>
> The rdpmc instruction allows reading performance counters directly
> from usersapce. Prior to Linux 4.0 any process could use this
> instruction when a perf event was running, even if the process itself
> did not have any open. The following change
On 07/23/2015 07:16 PM, Vince Weaver wrote:
>
> Linux 4.1 added the possibility of perf_event_open() returning
> EBUSY if an existing exclusive event controls the PMU.
Thanks, Vince. Applied.
Cheers,
Michael
> This was introduced by the following commit:
>
> commit bed5b25ad9c8a2f5d735
On 07/23/2015 07:15 PM, Vince Weaver wrote:
>
>
> This manpage patch relates to the addition of the PERF_RECORD_ITRACE_START
> record type in the following commit:
Thanks, Vince. Applied.
Cheers,
Michael
> commit ec0d7729bbaed4b9d2d3fada693278e13a3d1368
> Author: Alexander Shishk
On 07/23/2015 07:14 PM, Vince Weaver wrote:
>
>
> This manpage patch relates to the addition of the aux_watermark attr
> field in the following commit:
Thanks, Vince. Applied.
Cheers,
Michael
> commit 1a5941312414c71dece6717da9a0fa1303127afa
> Author: Alexander Shishkin
>
>
On 07/23/2015 07:13 PM, Vince Weaver wrote:
>
> This manpage patch relates to the addition of the AUX sample flag
> AUX_FLAG_OVERWRITE as added in the following commit:
Thanks, Vince. Applied.
Cheers,
Michael
> commit 2023a0d2829e521fe6ad6b9907f3f90bfbf57142
> Author: Alexander S
On 07/23/2015 07:13 PM, Vince Weaver wrote:
>
> This manpage patch relates to the addition of the AUX sample type
> as added in the following commit:
Thanks, Vince. Applied.
Cheers,
Michael
> commit 68db7e98c3a6ebe7284b6cf14906ed7c55f3f7f0
> Author: Alexander Shishkin
>
>
On 07/23/2015 07:12 PM, Vince Weaver wrote:
>
> This manpage patch relates to the addition of the AUX mmap region
> as added in the following commit:
Thanks, Vince. Applied.
Cheers,
Michael
> commit 45bfb2e50471abbbfd83d40d28c986078b0d24ff
> Author: Peter Zijlstra
>
> pe
On 07/23/2015 07:11 PM, Vince Weaver wrote:
>
> This manpage patch relates to the addition of the data_offset
> and data_size fields to the perf_event mmap buffer, as added
> in the following commit:
Thanks, Vince. Applied.
Cheers,
Michael
> commit e8c6deac69629c0cb97c3d3272f8631ef17f8
On 07/23/2015 07:10 PM, Vince Weaver wrote:
>
> This manpage patch relates to the addition of the
> PERF_EVENT_IOC_SET_BPF ioctl in the following commit:
Thanks, Vince. Applied.
Cheers,
Michael
> commit 2541517c32be2531e0da59dfd7efc1ce844644f5
> Author: Alexei Starovoitov
>
On 07/23/2015 07:08 PM, Vince Weaver wrote:
>
> This manpage patch relates to the addition of the
> PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_CALL_STACK functionaliry added in the following
> commit:
>
> commit 2c44b1936bb3b135a3fac8b3493394d42e51cf70 Author: Peter
> Zijlstra
>
> perf/x86/intel: Expose LBR callstack
On 08/19/2015 03:40 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Aug 2015, Darren Hart wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 02:07:15PM +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>>> .\" FIXME XXX = Start of adapted Hart/Guniguntala text =
>>> .\" The
Hello Thomas,
Thanks for the follow up!
Some open questions below are marked with the string ###.
On 08/19/2015 04:17 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Aug 2015, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>>>>FUTEX_CMP_REQUEUE (since Linux 2.6.7)
>>>>
Hi Tycho,
On 11 September 2015 at 02:21, Tycho Andersen
wrote:
> This commit adds a way to dump eBPF programs. The initial implementation
> doesn't support maps, and therefore only allows dumping seccomp ebpf
> programs which themselves don't currently support maps.
Same broken record :-).
Chee
On 11 September 2015 at 02:21, Tycho Andersen
wrote:
> This is the final bit needed to support seccomp filters created via the bpf
> syscall. The patch adds a new seccomp operation SECCOMP_MODE_FILTER_EBPF,
> which takes exactly one command (presumably to be expanded upon later when
> seccomp EBPF
On 11 September 2015 at 02:20, Tycho Andersen
wrote:
> seccomp uses eBPF as its underlying storage and execution format, and eBPF
> has features that seccomp would like to make use of in the future. This
> patch adds a formal seccomp type to the eBPF verifier.
>
> The current implementation of the
HI Tycho
On 11 September 2015 at 02:21, Tycho Andersen
wrote:
> This patch adds a way for a process that is "real root" to access the
> seccomp filters of another process. The process first does a
> PTRACE_SECCOMP_GET_FILTER_FD to get an fd with that process' seccomp filter
> attached, and then i
On 08/28/2015 08:42 PM, Eric B Munson wrote:
> When mremap() is used to move or expand a mapping that is locked with
> mlock() or equivalent it will attempt to populate the new area.
> However, like mmap(MAP_LOCKED), mremap() will not fail if the area
> cannot be populated. Also like mmap(MAP_LOCK
On 05/14/2015 07:30 PM, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> Add documentation.
Hi Andrea,
I do not recall... Did you write a man page also for this new system call?
Thanks,
Michael
> Signed-off-by: Andrea Arcangeli
> ---
> Documentation/vm/userfaultfd.txt | 140
>
Hi Andy,
Not that this has hit mainline, would you be willing to refresh this
man-pages patch?
Thanks,
Michael
On 15 May 2015 at 08:43, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Andy Lutomirski
> ---
>
> There was no v1. I'm calling this v2 to keep it in sync with the kernel
> patch versioni
On 09/04/2015 10:41 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 9:04 AM, Tycho Andersen
> wrote:
>> This is the final bit needed to support seccomp filters created via the bpf
>> syscall.
Hmm. Thanks Kees, for CCinf linux-api@. That really should have been done at
the outset.
Tycho, where's th
Hi Kees,
On 08/27/2015 06:32 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 6:42 PM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
> wrote:
>> Hello Kees, Will,
>>
>> In recent times I've been asked a couple of questions about seccomp(),
>> and it seems like it would be wo
Hello Kees, Will,
In recent times I've been asked a couple of questions about seccomp(),
and it seems like it would be worthwhile to include these topics in
the seccomp(2) man page. Would you be able to help out with some
answers?
=== Use of the instruction pointer in seccomp filters ===
The sec
On 13 August 2015 at 19:38, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 2:32 AM, David Drysdale wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: David Drysdale
>
> What's the behavior wrt fcntl(F_GETFL, etc)?
I would presume that O_BENEATH is one of the so-called "file creation
flags". See this paragraph of the D
Gidday,
The Linux man-pages maintainer proudly announces:
man-pages-4.02 - man pages for Linux
This release includes various new man pages and makes changes
in nearly 400 other pages, based on input and contributions from
around 15 people.
Tarball download:
http://www.kernel.org/doc/man
Hi Darren,
Some of my comments below will refer to the reply I just sent
to tglx (and the list) a few minutes ago.
On 08/06/2015 12:21 AM, Darren Hart wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 02:07:15PM +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> Hello all,
>>
>
> Michael, thank y
On 07/28/2015 11:03 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Jul 2015, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 10:23:51PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>
FUTEX_WAKE (since Linux 2.6.0)
This operation wakes at most val of the waiters that are
0:23 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Jul 2015, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>>FUTEX_CLOCK_REALTIME (since Linux 2.6.28)
>> This option bit can be employed only with the
>> FUTEX_WAIT_BITSET and FUTEX_WAIT_REQUEUE_PI ope
On 07/29/2015 06:21 AM, Darren Hart wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 09:11:41PM -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 10:23:51PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>> On Mon, 27 Jul 2015, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>>
On 07/28/2015 07:52 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-07-28 at 09:44 +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> Maybe you still have some further improvements for the paragraph?
>
> Nah, this is fine enough. Looks good.
Okay. Thanks. I added a Reviewed-by: for you.
C
Hi David,
On 07/28/2015 05:16 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-07-27 at 13:10 +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> Hi David,
>>
>> On 03/31/2015 04:45 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
>>> On Sat, 2015-03-28 at 12:47 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
&g
On 07/28/2015 04:52 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Sat, 2015-03-28 at 12:47 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> SEE ALSO
>>get_robust_list(2), restart_syscall(2), futex(7)
>
> For pi futexes, I also suggest pthread_mutexattr_getprotocol(3), which
> is a common entry point.
Thanks. Added.
Ch
On 07/27/2015 04:17 PM, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
> instruction. A thread maybe unable
>
> to << missing word
>
> acquire a lock because it is
> already acquired by another thread. It then may pass the lock's
> flag as futex word and the value representing the acquired state
> as the expected va
Hello all,
>From a draft sent out in March, I got a few useful comments that
I've now incorporated into this draft. And I got some complaints
from people who did not want to read groff source. My point
was that there are a bunch of FIXMEs in the page source that I
wanted people to look at... Anywa
Hi Peter,
On 03/28/2015 01:03 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 12:47:25PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>FUTEX_WAIT (since Linux 2.6.0)
>> This operation tests that the value at the futex word pointed
>> to
>> by the address uaddr still conta
On 04/15/2015 12:28 PM, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-04-14 at 23:40 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> On Sat, 28 Mar 2015, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>> On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 09:53:21AM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>>>> So, please take a look at
Hello Pavel,
On 04/27/2015 10:37 PM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> The FUTEX_WAIT_OP operation is equivalent to execute the
>> follow???
>> ing code atomically and totally ordered with respect to
>> other
>> futex operations on any of the two suppli
Hi David,
On 03/31/2015 04:45 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Sat, 2015-03-28 at 12:47 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
>>The condition is represented by the futex word, which is an address
>> in
>>memory supplied to the futex() system call, and the value at this
>> mem‐
>>
On 03/31/2015 03:48 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
> "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" writes:
>> When executing a futex operation that requests to block a thread,
>> the kernel will only block if the futex word has the value that the
>> calling thread supplied as expected va
601 - 700 of 1248 matches
Mail list logo
