linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ipc/sem: 64bit union semun definition

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 05 May 2015 23:40:17 +0200
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Sandy Sun <a22017@...orola.com>
Cc:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipc/sem: 64bit union semun definition

On Tuesday 05 May 2015 14:09:14 Sandy Sun wrote:
> Hi Arnd,
> 
> If user space uses union semun to define.It will use semid_ds not
> semid64_ds.
> 
> I used LTP test case semctl01 IPC_STAT to do the test on 64 bit
> system.According to the test results:
> 
> Before the change, semun uses semid_ds, the field of sem_nsems reporting of
> semaphore STAT info is incorrect:
> 
> semctl01    1  TFAIL  :  semaphore STAT info is incorrect
> semctl01    2  TFAIL  :  semaphore mode info is incorrect
> 
> After this change, the return value is correct:
> semctl01    1  TPASS  :  buf.sem_nsems and buf.sem_perm.mode are correct
> semctl01    2  TPASS  :  buf.sem_perm.mode is correct

I don't understand: semctl01 does not reference 'union semun64'. How
does this change make a difference, and why would that difference
be limited to 64-bit systems?

	Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/