linux-kernel - Re: Interface for the new fallocate() system call

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

Message-ID: <20070330083918.GD8365@osiris.boeblingen.de.ibm.com>
Date:	Fri, 30 Mar 2007 10:39:18 +0200
From:	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
To:	Jakub Jelinek <jakub@...hat.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Amit K. Arora" <aarora@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
	xfs@....sgi.com, suparna@...ibm.com, cmm@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: Interface for the new fallocate() system call

On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 02:14:17AM -0500, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 10:10:10AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > Platform: s390
> > > --------------
> > > s390 prefers following layout:
> > > 
> > >    int fallocate(int fd, loff_t offset, loff_t len, int mode)
> > > 
> > > For details on why and how "int, int, loff_t, loff_t" is a problem on
> > > s390, please see Heiko's mail on 16th March. Here is the link:
> > > http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg133595.html
> > > 
> > > Platform: ppc, arm
> > > ------------------
> > > ppc (32 bit) has a problem with "int, loff_t, loff_t, int" layout,
> > > since this will result in a pad between fd and offset, making seven
> > > arguments total - which is not supported by ppc32. It supports only
> > > 6 arguments. Thus the desired layout by ppc32 is:
> > > 
> > >    int fallocate(int fd, int mode, loff_t offset, loff_t len)
> > > 
> > > Even ARM prefers above kind of layout. For details please see the
> > > definition of sys_arm_sync_file_range().
> > 
> > This is a clean-looking option.  Can s390 be changed to support seven-arg
> > syscalls?
> 
> Wouldn't
> int fallocate(loff_t offset, loff_t len, int fd, int mode)
> work on both s390 and ppc/arm?  glibc will certainly wrap it and
> reorder the arguments as needed, so there is no need to keep fd first.

That would be fine for s390.
-
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/