Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1377844

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

From "Richard W.M. Jones" <rjones@redhat.com>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject [PATCH 0/2] vfs: Define new syscall getumask.
Date 2016-04-13 13:50 +0200
Message-ID <rnrt0-BH-11@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


It's not possible to read the process umask without also modifying it,
which is what umask(2) does.  A library cannot read umask safely,
especially if the main program might be multithreaded.

This patch series adds a trivial system call "getumask" which returns
the umask of the current process.

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

Another way to solve this would be to add a thread-safe getumask to
glibc.  Since glibc could own the mutex, this would permit libraries
linked to this glibc to read umask safely.

I should also note that man-pages documents getumask(3), but no
version of glibc has ever implemented it.

Typical test script:

#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <linux/unistd.h>
#include <sys/syscall.h>

int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
  int r = syscall(329);
  if (r == -1) {
    perror("getumask");
    exit(1);
  }
  printf("umask = %o\n", r);
  exit(0);
}

$ ./getumask 
umask = 22

Rich.

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

[PATCH 0/2] vfs: Define new syscall getumask. "Richard W.M. Jones" <rjones@redhat.com> - 2016-04-13 13:50 +0200

csiph-web