linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 02/30] x86-64: Use explicit sizes in sigcontext.h, prepare for x32

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: <201202221222.58399.arnd@arndb.de>
Date:	Wed, 22 Feb 2012 12:22:58 +0000
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
	mingo@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	hjl.tools@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/30] x86-64: Use explicit sizes in sigcontext.h, prepare for x32

On Monday 20 February 2012, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> We are using __u64 as x86-32 compatible since we are sharing most of the
> really complex path (like ioctl) with i386 much more so than x86-64.  So
> it is defined in userspace as:
> 
> typedef unsigned long long __u64 __attribute__((aligned(4)));
> 
> __aligned_u64 obviously is naturally aligned, which matches uint64_t is
> userspace.

Has someone audited the interfaces to check if there are data structures that
use a plain signed or unsigned "long long" instead of __s64/__u64 in places
where i386 differs from the other compat implementations?

I found DRM_IOCTL_UPDATE_DRAW, but there could be more like this one.

	Arnd
--
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/