linux-kernel - Re: RFD: x32 ABI system call numbers

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: <CAMe9rOofkcOarfWE1PcHcgLwM+hKdTkXZZr4e_n3v-Avb+bN=g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 4 Sep 2011 12:31:25 -0700
From:	"H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Richard Kuo <rkuo@...eaurora.org>,
	Mark Salter <msalter@...hat.com>,
	Jonas Bonn <jonas@...thpole.se>,
	Tobias Klauser <tklauser@...tanz.ch>
Subject: Re: RFD: x32 ABI system call numbers

On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 12:06 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
> On Sunday 04 September 2011 11:40:39 H.J. Lu wrote:
>> #define __NR_x32_rt_sigaction
>> #define __NR_x32_rt_sigprocmask
>> #define __NR_x32_rt_sigreturn
>> #define __NR_x32_rt_sigpending
>> #define __NR_x32_rt_sigtimedwait
>> #define __NR_x32_rt_sigqueueinfo
>> #define __NR_x32_rt_tgsigqueueinfo
>> #define __NR_x32_sigaltstack
>> #define __NR_x32_waitid
>> #define __NR_x32_mq_notify
>> #define __NR_x32_timer_create
>
> Right, all signal functions certainly need a new implementation.

We only need to add stub_x32_rt_sigreturn, stub_x32_execve,
stub_x32_sigaltstack and stub_x32_sigaltstack   The rest use
x86-32 system calls.

>> #define __NR_x32_ioctl
>
> What do you plan to do for ioctl? Does this mean you want to
> have a third file_operations pointer besides ioctl and compat_ioctl?
> I would hope that you manage this by using different ioctl command
> numbers in the few cases where the x32 version has to differ from
> the x86-32 data structure.

This requires some kernel changes since x32 has 32bit pointers and 64bit
time_t/timespec/timeval.   We can't use straight x86-32 nor x86-64.

>> #define __NR_x32_readv
>> #define __NR_x32_writev
>> #define __NR_x32_preadv
>> #define __NR_x32_pwritev
>> #define __NR_x32_vmsplice
>> #define __NR_x32_move_pages
>> #define __NR_x32_execve
>> #define __NR_x32_set_robust_list
>> #define __NR_x32_get_robust_list
>> #define __NR_x32__sysctl
>> #define __NR_x32_kexec_load
>> #define __NR_x32_times
>
> I guess you could define the x32 iovec etc. to be compatible with the
> 64 bit one, but that's not a major thing. Why can't you use the
> regular x86_32 calls here?

I am using the regular  x86_32 calls for them.

>
>> #define __NR_x32_recvfrom
>> #define __NR_x32_sendmsg
>> #define __NR_x32_recvmsg
>> #define __NR_x32_recvmmsg
>> #define __NR_x32_sendmmsg
>
> These today use the MSG_CMSG_COMPAT flag to distinguish native and compat
> calls. Do you plan to have another flag here to handle cmsg time values?

I am using x86-32 calls for them.

> What about things like mq_{get,set}attr, quotactl and semtimedop?
>

I am using 64bit system calls for x32.

-- 
H.J.
--
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/