linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 20/25] arm64:ilp32: add sys_ilp32.c and a separate table (in entry.S) to use it

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: <2733875.IzutTZKHMc@wuerfel>
Date:	Thu, 12 May 2016 11:21:42 +0200
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
Cc:	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Pinski <Andrew.Pinski@...iumnetworks.com>,
	heiko.carstens@...ibm.com, Yury Norov <ynorov@...iumnetworks.com>,
	Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@...wei.com>, joseph@...esourcery.com,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
	"jijun (D)" <jijun2@...wei.com>, Prasun.Kapoor@...iumnetworks.com,
	schwab@...e.de, agraf@...e.de, pinskia@...il.com,
	klimov.linux@...il.com, broonie@...nel.org,
	"Zhangjian (Bamvor)" <bamvor.zhangjian@...wei.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, Nathan_Lynch@...tor.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Pinski <apinski@...ium.com>,
	schwidefsky@...ibm.com, christoph.muellner@...obroma-systems.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 20/25] arm64:ilp32: add sys_ilp32.c and a separate table (in entry.S) to use it

On Thursday 12 May 2016 10:17:58 Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 09:30:07PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Wednesday 11 May 2016 17:59:01 Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > 
> > I don't think the shifts are a problem, the main downside would be
> > the limit to 44 bits of file offsets (16TB files), but it's also
> > unclear if that is a practical problem at all. If it is, we run
> > into the same problem on all other 32-bit architectures too.
> 
> I hope people are seriously thinking of moving to an LP64 ABI if they
> have such large file offset needs.

Good point. 44 bits of file size is certainly enough for mmap()
on a 32-bit task: you would only be able to map a very small fraction
of the file anyway, and if you want to map larger files, and should
move to 64-bit tasks long before this becomes a limitation.

	Arnd