linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] Rename ia32entry.S to entry_64_compat

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]

Date:	Fri, 5 Jun 2015 14:37:22 -0700
From:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
	Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] Rename ia32entry.S to entry_64_compat_32.S

On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 2:09 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
> Call it sys if it is now only the system call entry points.  Agreed with _64_compat too.
>
> Breaking up these snarls of spaghetti assembly will be a blessing.

I'm not too picky about what we call it or whether we merge it with
entry_64.S.  *However*, I think the file name should end in _64.S.
The whole arch/x86 tree is arranged such that files that end in _64.S
or _64.c are build for 64-bit kernels and not for 32-bit kernels.  I
see no reason to deviate from that.

FWIW, I'm eventually planning to completely rewrite the compat entry
points to use the new (RFC patches coming in a week or two I hope!) C
exit code with opportunistic sysretl at the end.  I'm guessing the
result will be about half the size of the current code, and it'll be
comprehensible to mere mortals.

--Andy

>
> On June 5, 2015 6:37:14 AM PDT, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:
>>On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 03:00:29PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>> I'm wondering what people think about this naming scheme:
>>>
>>>                   entry_32.S            # 32-bit binaries on 32-bit
>>kernels
>>>                   entry_64.S            # 64-bit binaries on 64-bit
>>kernels
>>>                   entry_64_compat_32.S  # 32-bit binaries on 64-bit
>>kernels
>>>
>>> Another option would be:
>>>
>>>    arch/x86/entry/sys_32.S
>>>    arch/x86/entry/sys_64.S
>>>    arch/x86/entry/sys_64_compat.S
>>
>>I like this one better because entry_64_compat_32 kinda has both
>>bitness in
>>there and confuses me more.
>>
>>Just my 2 ¢. :)
>
> --
> Sent from my mobile phone.  Please pardon brevity and lack of formatting.



-- 
Andy Lutomirski
AMA Capital Management, LLC
--
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/