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: <4E63DB86.2090404@zytor.com>
Date:	Sun, 04 Sep 2011 13:11:50 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
CC:	"H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.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

> 
>> #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 *should* just be an entry for compat_ioctl in the x86-64 system
call table (as opposed to the i386 system call table.)

>> #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?

They still need to be bound to x86-64 system call entry points.  (Well,
in theory they could be invoked via int $0x80, but that is ugly in a
whole lot of ways.)

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

	-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/