From 6cbe58797781cb8514a62bb3ab0e3e8a5d58bce2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: dzwdz Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2023 01:06:41 +0200 Subject: kernel: add _sys_getprocfs in place of HANDLE_PROCFS This makes the side-effects more explicit, and feels less hacky than `HANDLE_PROCFS`. I don't think accessing a handle alone should have side-effects, even if it's a "special" one. --- src/kernel/syscalls.c | 18 +++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) (limited to 'src/kernel/syscalls.c') diff --git a/src/kernel/syscalls.c b/src/kernel/syscalls.c index 0dda320..b040285 100644 --- a/src/kernel/syscalls.c +++ b/src/kernel/syscalls.c @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ #include #include #include +#include #include #include @@ -120,7 +121,6 @@ long _sys_mount(hid_t hid, const char __user *path, long len) { // remove trailing slash // mounting something under `/this` and `/this/` should be equalivent if (path_buf[len - 1] == '/') { - if (len == 0) goto fail; len--; } @@ -404,6 +404,21 @@ int _sys_wait2(int pid, int flags, struct sys_wait2 __user *out) { return 0; // dummy } +hid_t _sys_getprocfs(int flags) { + if (flags != 0) { + SYSCALL_RETURN(-ENOSYS); + } + proc_ns_create(proc_cur); + + Handle *h; + hid_t hid = proc_handle_init(proc_cur, HANDLE_FS_FRONT, &h); + if (hid < 0) { + SYSCALL_RETURN(-EMFILE); + } + h->backend = procfs_backend(proc_cur); + SYSCALL_RETURN(hid); +} + long _sys_execbuf(void __user *ubuf, size_t len) { if (len == 0) SYSCALL_RETURN(0); if (len > EXECBUF_MAX_LEN) @@ -458,6 +473,7 @@ long _syscall(long num, long a, long b, long c, long d, long e) { break; case _SYS_GETPID: _sys_getpid(); break; case _SYS_GETPPID: _sys_getppid(); break; case _SYS_WAIT2: _sys_wait2(a, b, (userptr_t)c); + break; case _SYS_GETPROCFS: _sys_getprocfs(a); break; case _SYS_EXECBUF: _sys_execbuf((userptr_t)a, b); break; case _SYS_DEBUG_KLOG: _sys_debug_klog((userptr_t)a, b); break; -- cgit v1.2.3