[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJwJo6ae-OjJEjyzgqVDkwhjtAnK=DzEDpaCPSgFThpmyF4LWQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2016 00:59:09 +0300
From: Dmitry Safonov <0x7f454c46@...il.com>
To: Kyle Huey <me@...ehuey.com>
Cc: "Robert O'Callahan" <robert@...llahan.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@...nel.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Milosz Tanski <milosz@...in.com>,
"Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@...linux.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Zach Brown <zab@...hat.com>,
Eric B Munson <emunson@...mai.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Dmitry Safonov <dsafonov@...tuozzo.com>,
Mateusz Guzik <mguzik@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RESEND][PATCH v2 1/3] syscalls,x86 Expose arch_prctl on x86-32.
2016-09-15 0:08 GMT+03:00 Kyle Huey <me@...ehuey.com>:
> Signed-off-by: Kyle Huey <khuey@...ehuey.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/entry/syscalls/syscall_32.tbl | 1 +
> arch/x86/kernel/process.c | 80 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> arch/x86/kernel/process_64.c | 66 ----------------------------
> 3 files changed, 81 insertions(+), 66 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/entry/syscalls/syscall_32.tbl b/arch/x86/entry/syscalls/syscall_32.tbl
> index f848572..3b6965b 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/entry/syscalls/syscall_32.tbl
> +++ b/arch/x86/entry/syscalls/syscall_32.tbl
> @@ -386,3 +386,4 @@
> 377 i386 copy_file_range sys_copy_file_range
> 378 i386 preadv2 sys_preadv2 compat_sys_preadv2
> 379 i386 pwritev2 sys_pwritev2 compat_sys_pwritev2
> +380 i386 arch_prctl sys_arch_prctl
Why not define it as other 32-bit syscalls with compat_sys_ prefix
with the help of COMPAT_SYSCALL_DEFINE() macro?
Then you could omit code moving, drop is_32 helper.
I miss something obvious?
--
Dmitry
Powered by blists - more mailing lists