linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 08/19] arm64: introduce is_a32_task and is_a32

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: <4650742.YG7pOR48ul@wuerfel>
Date:	Tue, 21 Jun 2016 17:47:44 +0200
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	libc-alpha@...rceware.org
Cc:	Andreas Schwab <schwab@...e.de>,
	"Zhangjian (Bamvor)" <bamvor.zhangjian@...wei.com>,
	Yury Norov <ynorov@...iumnetworks.com>,
	catalin.marinas@....com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, schwidefsky@...ibm.com,
	heiko.carstens@...ibm.com, pinskia@...il.com, broonie@...nel.org,
	joseph@...esourcery.com, christoph.muellner@...obroma-systems.com,
	szabolcs.nagy@....com, klimov.linux@...il.com,
	Nathan_Lynch@...tor.com, agraf@...e.de,
	Prasun.Kapoor@...iumnetworks.com, kilobyte@...band.pl,
	geert@...ux-m68k.org, philipp.tomsich@...obroma-systems.com,
	manuel.montezelo@...il.com, linyongting@...wei.com,
	maxim.kuvyrkov@...aro.org, davem@...emloft.net,
	Andrew Pinski <Andrew.Pinski@...iumnetworks.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/19] arm64: introduce is_a32_task and is_a32_thread (for AArch32 compat)

On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 1:34:59 PM CEST Andreas Schwab wrote:
> "Zhangjian (Bamvor)" <bamvor.zhangjian@...wei.com> writes:
> 
> >> @@ -78,9 +79,9 @@
> >>
> >>   #ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT
> >>   #define TASK_SIZE_32               UL(0x100000000)
> >> -#define TASK_SIZE           (test_thread_flag(TIF_32BIT) ? \
> >> +#define TASK_SIZE           (is_compat_task() ?             \
> >>                              TASK_SIZE_32 : TASK_SIZE_64)
> >> -#define TASK_SIZE_OF(tsk)   (test_tsk_thread_flag(tsk, TIF_32BIT) ? \
> >> +#define TASK_SIZE_OF(tsk)   (is_compat_thread(tsk) ? \
> > It should be
> > +#define TASK_SIZE_OF(tsk)      (is_compat_thread(task_thread_info(tsk)) ? \
> > is_compat_thread takes "struct thread_info *thread" while TASK_SIZE_OF takes
> > "struct task_struct *tsk"tsk.
> 
> If that doesn't throw an error does that mean that TASK_SIZE_OF is
> unused?

I think that is correct. On some architectures, TASK_SIZE (which is used)
is defined as TASK_SIZE_OF(current), but the definition above doesn't
do that and there are no other users.

	Arnd