linux-kernel - Re: 64-bit syscall ABI issue

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: <20070604.142557.68139332.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Mon, 04 Jun 2007 14:25:57 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	joseph@...esourcery.com
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mips@...ux-mips.org,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 64-bit syscall ABI issue

From: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@...esourcery.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 20:56:57 +0000 (UTC)

[ added linux-arch which is a great place to discuss these
  kinds of issues. ]

> What should the kernel syscall ABI be in such cases (any case where the 
> syscall implementations expect arguments narrower than registers, so 
> mainly 32-bit arguments on 64-bit platforms)?  There are two obvious 
> possibilities:

In general we've taken the stance that the syscall dispatch
should create the proper calling environment for C code
implementing the system calls, and this thus means properly
sign and zero extending the arguments as expected by the C
calling convention.
-
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/