linux-kernel - [x86] Strange 64-bit put

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <49F73D96.2090801@garzik.org>
Date:	Tue, 28 Apr 2009 13:32:06 -0400
From:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC:	x86@...nel.org
Subject: [x86] Strange 64-bit put_user ?

In arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h, if !CONFIG_X86_32, we see

> #define __put_user_x8(x, ptr, __ret_pu) \
>         ({ u64 __ret_pu; __put_user_x(8, x, ptr, __ret_pu); (int)__ret_pu; })

which was preceded by

> #define __put_user_x(size, x, ptr, __ret_pu)                    \
>         asm volatile("call __put_user_" #size : "=a" (__ret_pu) \
>                      :"0" ((typeof(*(ptr)))(x)), "c" (ptr) : "ebx")


My question, from an admitted inline asm newbie:

Why is 32-bit register 'ebx' being used for a 64-bit put_user?

And a dumb-question follow-up, probably easy, for any x86 expert:  why 
are registers 'bl' and 'bx' not used for 8-bit and 16-bit put_user, 
respectively?

Thanks,

	Jeff



--
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/