linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/8] Update kernel uabi header files 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: <20131228163308.GA1638@infradead.org>
Date:	Sat, 28 Dec 2013 08:33:08 -0800
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	"H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>
Cc:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] Update kernel uabi header files for x32

On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 02:14:16PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> X32 uses the same kernel system call interface as x86-64 for many
> system calls.  However, "long" is 64-bit for x86-64 and is 32-bit for
> x32.  Where long or unsigned long are used in struct types for such
> system calls, they are wrong for x32.  __kernel_[u]long_t is [unsigned]
> long for all ABIs other than x32.  I am submitting 8 patches to replace
> long or unsigned long with __kernel_[u]long_t so that those struct types
> can be used with x32 system calls.

Independent on how this fixes things, how does the kernel_long_t name
here make any sense?

On x86-64 "kernel" long always is 64 bits wide.  The userspace ABI long
might be 32 or 64bits wide.

Currently kernel_long_t has almost no uses, so it might be a good time
to fix the name, define the rules for it, and last but not least
properly document the intent for thse types.

--
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/