On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 02:53:24PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 08:44:20AM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote:
> > Afaict, the struct seccomp_data argument to secure_computing() is unused
> > by all current callers. So let's remove it.
> > The argument was added in [1]. It was adde
On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 08:44:20AM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote:
> Afaict, the struct seccomp_data argument to secure_computing() is unused
> by all current callers. So let's remove it.
> The argument was added in [1]. It was added because having the arch
> supply the syscall arguments used to be
On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 11:44 PM Christian Brauner
wrote:
>
> Afaict, the struct seccomp_data argument to secure_computing() is unused
> by all current callers. So let's remove it.
> The argument was added in [1]. It was added because having the arch
> supply the syscall arguments used to be faste
On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 08:44:20AM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote:
> Afaict, the struct seccomp_data argument to secure_computing() is unused
> by all current callers. So let's remove it.
> The argument was added in [1]. It was added because having the arch
> supply the syscall arguments used to be
Afaict, the struct seccomp_data argument to secure_computing() is unused
by all current callers. So let's remove it.
The argument was added in [1]. It was added because having the arch
supply the syscall arguments used to be faster than having it done by
secure_computing() (cf. Andy's comment in [2
5 matches
Mail list logo