linux-kernel - Re: 64-syscall args on 32-bit vs syscall()

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: <20100314.220646.190065794.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Sun, 14 Mar 2010 22:06:46 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	benh@...nel.crashing.org
Cc:	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	kernel@...savvy.com, drepper@...hat.com,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, munroesj@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: 64-syscall args on 32-bit vs syscall()

From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 15:48:13 +1100

> As it is, any 32-bit app using syscall() on any of the syscalls that
> takes 64-bit arguments will be broken, unless the app itself breaks up
> the argument, but the the order of the hi and lo part is different
> between BE and LE architectures ;-)

I think it is even different on the same endian architectures,
f.e. mips I think.

There is no way to do this without some arch specific code
to handle things properly, really.
--
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/