This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On 03/25/2014 04:07 AM, Rich Felker wrote:
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 03:16:44PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
But back to the topic, I was assuming correct behavior from the kernel. If the kernel misbehaves, aborting is a perfectly reasonable response (but if LSM's make the kernel lie, can you even tell if it misbehaved?).trying to stack the deck against failure is a good idea, but that is orthogonal to checking the return value. there's no good reason at all to not check & abort when the call fails. -mikeAgreed.
So what about the patch? I have put kernel support on my to-do list, but I have other kernel items that I want to deal with first.
-- Florian Weimer / Red Hat Product Security Team
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |