linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/1] x86: should 32 bit processes be PER

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: <4C8FBCCA.6060001@zytor.com>
Date:	Tue, 14 Sep 2010 11:19:54 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>
CC:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
	x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] x86: should 32 bit processes be PER_LINUX32

On 09/14/2010 09:00 AM, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
> While testing an x86 64 bit kernel on 32 bit userspace I noticed that I
> was unexpectedly seeing x86_64 as the architecture as reported in uname.
> The kernel seems to have code to detect 32 bit userspace and slam this
> to i686, triggered off the personality PER_LINUX32.  However 32 bit
> processes do not seem to get this flag.  I think this is an oversight.
> The following patch attempts to fix this up.

No, it's not an oversight.  It's possible to hide it behind PER_LINUX32,
but that's a bigger hammer that not all users want.

	-hpa
--
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/