From: Ronald G Minnich <rminnich@lanl.gov>
To: <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] Ephase question.
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 10:22:11 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0208151017450.5892-100000@xed.acl.lanl.gov> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3D5AC78B.E19A9DA1@null.net>
On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Douglas A. Gwyn wrote:
> > What matters is expressibility without bloat, not finding
> > the criteria under which to claim a lower count of
> > functions of type T, for some T.
>
> It can depend on one's goal. For example, if a primary goal
> is proof of security, it seems intractible unless the number
> of primitive functions is fairly small and each has a fairly
> clean specification. Reliability and correctness, ditto.
Why I care about "how many system calls"; check out the Unix (Linux)
system call list nowadays. There are lots of different resource types
(pathnames, sysctl names, fds, pids, etc. etc) and consequently lots of
different difficulties. Just watching the freebsd 'jail' discussion has
been interesting. How do you ever secure an interface this complicated?
Seems very hard, and has proven to be hard in practice.
It's not just "reduce T for some T". Exploding system call counts can
indicate a problem with the design of the system (see some of the later
Linux system calls ...).
ron
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-08-15 16:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-08-14 13:19 rob pike, esq.
2002-08-15 8:59 ` Douglas A. Gwyn
2002-08-15 16:22 ` Ronald G Minnich [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-08-14 14:12 Russ Cox
2002-08-13 23:49 rog
2002-08-13 17:28 Russ Cox
2002-08-13 17:01 rob pike, esq.
2002-08-13 16:37 anothy
2002-08-13 15:59 Russ Cox
2002-08-14 8:42 ` Douglas A. Gwyn
2002-08-13 15:57 Russ Cox
2002-08-13 15:43 rob pike, esq.
2002-08-13 13:13 rog
2002-08-13 12:16 presotto
2002-08-13 15:53 ` Ronald G Minnich
2002-08-13 11:43 David Gordon Hogan
2002-08-13 15:45 ` Ronald G Minnich
2002-08-13 6:17 Charles Forsyth
[not found] <rsc@plan9.bell-labs.com>
2002-08-13 5:42 ` Russ Cox
2002-08-13 5:53 ` Scott Schwartz
2002-08-13 6:05 ` Ronald G Minnich
2002-08-13 6:22 ` Alexander Viro
2002-08-13 6:13 ` Alexander Viro
2002-08-13 4:20 Russ Cox
2002-08-13 3:37 rob pike, esq.
2002-08-13 9:31 ` Douglas A. Gwyn
2002-08-13 3:33 presotto
2002-08-13 4:10 ` Alexander Viro
2002-08-13 5:39 ` Ronald G Minnich
2002-08-19 16:23 ` Boyd Roberts
2002-08-13 6:46 ` Andrew Lynch
2002-08-13 22:07 ` Roman V. Shaposhnick
2002-08-13 3:31 Russ Cox
2002-08-13 1:39 presotto
2002-08-13 3:14 ` Roman V. Shaposhnick
2002-08-13 1:26 Roman V. Shaposhnick
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.33.0208151017450.5892-100000@xed.acl.lanl.gov \
--to=rminnich@lanl.gov \
--cc=9fans@cse.psu.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).