> From: "Theo de Raadt" <dera...@openbsd.org> > Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2020 09:13:24 -0600 > > Ted Unangst <t...@tedunangst.com> wrote: > > > On 2020-07-08, Theo de Raadt wrote: > > > I think we need something like this. > > > > > > Documenting it will be a challenge. > > > > > > I really don't like the name as is too generic, when the control is only > > > for a narrow set of "current time" system calls. > > > > I thought I'd start with something, but lots of questions. > > > > Should it be per wrapper? > > Perhaps not named per syscall, but named per grouping. This causes > direct syscalls for time retrieval. Can you find a name for that? > > > I know in the past we've had some similar > > conversations about eliminating syscalls (open/openat) > > I don't think we'll be doing that, because it doesn't really make the > world any better and, as is evident with time handling mangles ktrace > too much. > > > Initial thought is it's easier to make one button, and then document > > it in ktrace perhaps? > > Probably in kdump also. > > Hang on. Do people ever want to force time calls, outside of ktrace? > I doubt it. Should ktrace maybe have a flag, similar to -B with LD_BIND_NOW, > which sets the new environment variable? Maybe -T? The problem smells very > similar to the root cause for LD_BIND_NOW setting..
Yes. I think that makes lot of sense. And I don't think we need to document the envionment variable in that case.
