linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86-64: re-use kernel/syscall_table

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Wed, 27 Apr 2011 08:41:58 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...ell.com>
CC:	mingo@...e.hu, tglx@...utronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86-64: re-use kernel/syscall_table_32.S in	 ia32/ia32entry.S

On 04/27/2011 08:33 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> This requires a little bit of renaming, and a (much shorter than the
> original full table) set of #define-s for those table entries where
> native and compat mode entries differ.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...ell.com>

Hm... not 100% sure I think this is an improvement, partly because it
creates "action at a distance" -- you now have to look in two separate
places to find out what actually happens with a system call -- and
because the i386 table is already a bit of an "odd man out".  I would
much rather like to see a setup where you have __SYSCALL() macros in
unistd_64.h-style and perhaps augment it with a 3-operand __SYSCALL()
macro for the case where compat and non-compat are different.

What do you think?

	-hpa
-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.

--
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/