On Sun, 2007-06-24 at 22:45 -0500, Matt Mackall wrote:
quoted text
> On Sun, Jun 24, 2007 at 07:45:04PM +0200, Alexander Gabert wrote:
> > Hi Linus,
> > hi LKML,
> > 
> > i would like to thank LKML and especially Eric (thanks for the per_cpu 
> > macro tips and design guidelines!) and the other contributors to this idea.
> > 
> > This time the patch is rather big because it also removes 
> > get_random_int() and introduces get_random_long() throughout the kernel.
> 
> Stop right there. You still haven't answered my original question.
> What is the point of this exercise in the first place, please?
> 
> Am I right in thinking you have three unrelated patches here?
> 
> - something to do with aux vector headers

the primary goal is to pass a random value to userspace at process
start; this to save glibc from having to open /dev/urandom on ever
program start (which it does now for all apps compiled with
-fstack-protector, which in various distros is "everything").

quoted text
> - sweeping change of get_random_int to get_random_long for no obvious reason

and this is because Alexander wants 2 and not 1 random int to be passed
for his own glibc proposed change (combined with get_random_int() being
designed for only 4 bytes per process ;-)

-- 
if you want to mail me at work (you don't), use arjan (at) linux.intel.com
Test the interaction between Linux and your BIOS via http://www.linuxfirmwarekit.org

-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/