From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Oct 24 13:55:50 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 426FF16A58C; Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:55:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [209.31.154.42]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8053D43D60; Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:55:49 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [209.31.154.41]) by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C13C46D96; Tue, 24 Oct 2006 09:55:49 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2006 14:55:48 +0100 (BST) From: Robert Watson X-X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: Maxim Sobolev In-Reply-To: <453DEB1B.6040900@FreeBSD.org> Message-ID: <20061024145506.G48521@fledge.watson.org> References: <200610240818.k9O8IATH022313@repoman.freebsd.org> <20061024094643.N37455@fledge.watson.org> <453DDED4.3070208@FreeBSD.org> <20061024104143.Y37455@fledge.watson.org> <453DE26E.3040502@FreeBSD.org> <20061024105800.J37455@fledge.watson.org> <453DEB1B.6040900@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.bin/su su.c X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:55:50 -0000 On Tue, 24 Oct 2006, Maxim Sobolev wrote: > Robert Watson wrote: >> The method by which the distinction between ENOSYS+SIGSYS and plain ENOSYS >> is determined is in the implementation of the system call. If a system >> call is flagged as unimplemented (i.e., you never hit the function >> implementing it), you get SIGSYS+ENOSYS. If you enter the stub, you get >> ENOSYS. So the problem is that the compat code doesn't enter the stub, so >> never gets to the ENOSYS path. A casual glance at the system call >> arguments for audit suggest that wrappers aren't needed (no pointers >> embedded in structure arguments), so simply marking them as implemented >> will likely work. > > Well unless I have confused something it is not really the case. For > example, getauid() system call takes pointer as an argument. I've gone ahead and updated the freebsd32 syscalls.master file to hook up the audit system calls. Could you locally back out your change and see if a kernel built with these changes operates properly? Thanks, Robert N M Watson Computer Laboratory University of Cambridge