Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] vfs: Define new syscall getumask.

From	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] vfs: Define new syscall getumask.
Date	2016-04-14 04:20 +0200
Message-ID	<rnF2W-2OB-17@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<rnsyK-1lV-23@gated-at.bofh.it> <rnv3A-3mt-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <rnAcV-7zA-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 09:01:25PM +0000, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> I'm actually discussing 3 separate things here: the umask, sigmask, and
> cpu affinity mask.

The last two are available in /proc/<pid>/status --- which brings up
the question why not just add umask to /proc/<pid>/status?

That way the shared library can read it via /proc/self/status, but
this way it would be possible to look at other process's umask values
this as well.

> >> Another approach to this has been attempted before, adding something
> >> to /proc, although it didn't go anywhere.  See:
> >> 
> >>  http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1292109

... and indeed that's what I suggested.  It looks like from the thread
that it petered out due to apathy instead of people not liking the
idea.

One other reason to suggest using a /proc file is that you're not at
the mercy of the glibc folks to wire up a new system call.  (Glibc has
been refusing to wire up getrandom(2), for example.   Grrrr.....)

     	      	      	 	       	   	      - Ted

Thread

[PATCH v2 0/2] vfs: Define new syscall getumask. "Richard W.M. Jones" <rjones@redhat.com> - 2016-04-13 15:00 +0200
  [PATCH v2 2/2] x86: Wire up new getumask system call on x86. "Richard W.M. Jones" <rjones@redhat.com> - 2016-04-13 15:00 +0200
  Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] vfs: Define new syscall getumask. Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> - 2016-04-13 16:10 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] vfs: Define new syscall getumask. Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> - 2016-04-14 05:50 +0200
      Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] vfs: Define new syscall getumask. Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> - 2016-04-14 21:30 +0200
  Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] vfs: Define new syscall getumask. Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> - 2016-04-13 17:40 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] vfs: Define new syscall getumask. Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> - 2016-04-13 23:10 +0200
      Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] vfs: Define new syscall getumask. Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> - 2016-04-14 04:20 +0200
      Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] vfs: Define new syscall getumask. Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> - 2016-04-14 20:00 +0200
  Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] vfs: Define new syscall getumask. Colin Walters <walters@verbum.org> - 2016-04-13 17:50 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] vfs: Define new syscall getumask. "Richard W.M. Jones" <rjones@redhat.com> - 2016-04-13 18:10 +0200

csiph-web