Re: [PATCHv4 0/6] sys_indirect system call

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Ulrich Drepper
Date: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 - 11:17 am

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Zach Brown wrote:

All correct.  I just want to point out that the proposed interface is
sufficiently prepared for this and that there is no need to wait adding
this initial, synchronous syscall stuff before the syslet stuff is
ready.  These interface changes are security-relevant and should be
added ASAP.

- --
➧ Ulrich Drepper ➧ Red Hat, Inc. ➧ 444 Castro St ➧ Mountain View, CA ❖
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHQySu2ijCOnn/RHQRAnQqAKCz0JzvmAeEcL8m77jbEYAZ4ZFWXwCgpfvE
do7pJGn9XBu9jfQhfLkxQSc=
=eX6m
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[PATCHv4 0/6] sys_indirect system call, Ulrich Drepper, (Mon Nov 19, 11:53 pm)
Re: [PATCHv4 0/6] sys_indirect system call, Eric Dumazet, (Tue Nov 20, 2:13 am)
Re: [PATCHv4 0/6] sys_indirect system call, Ulrich Drepper, (Tue Nov 20, 9:11 am)
Re: [PATCHv4 0/6] sys_indirect system call, Zach Brown, (Tue Nov 20, 11:08 am)
Re: [PATCHv4 0/6] sys_indirect system call, Ulrich Drepper, (Tue Nov 20, 11:17 am)