linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] x86/uapi: fix asm/signal.h userspace compilation error

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: <20170302003356.GD27132@altlinux.org>
Date:   Thu, 2 Mar 2017 03:33:56 +0300
From:   "Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@...linux.org>
To:     hpa@...or.com
Cc:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86/uapi: fix asm/signal.h userspace compilation error

On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 04:26:29PM -0800, hpa@...or.com wrote:
> On March 1, 2017 4:18:54 PM PST, "Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@...linux.org> wrote:
> >Replace size_t to fix the following asm/signal.h userspace compilation
> >error:
> >
> >/usr/include/asm/signal.h:126:2: error: unknown type name 'size_t'
> >  size_t ss_size;
> >
> >size_t is replaced with __kernel_size_t in all cases except x32 where
> >unsigned int has to be used instead.
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Dmitry V. Levin <ldv@...linux.org>
> >---
> >v2: create a separate patch for x86,
> >    replace size_t instead of including <stddef.h>.
> >
> > arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/signal.h | 6 +++++-
> > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> >diff --git a/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/signal.h
> >b/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/signal.h
> >index 8264f47..f80473f 100644
> >--- a/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/signal.h
> >+++ b/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/signal.h
> >@@ -127,7 +127,11 @@ struct sigaction {
> > typedef struct sigaltstack {
> > 	void __user *ss_sp;
> > 	int ss_flags;
> >-	size_t ss_size;
> >+#if defined(__x86_64__) && defined(__ILP32__)
> >+	unsigned int ss_size;
> >+#else
> >+	__kernel_size_t ss_size;
> >+#endif
> > } stack_t;
> > 
> > #endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */
> 
> Sounds like we still ought to make this a type by itself.

A new type would need a name, like __kernel_uapi_size_t.
Do you have any preferences?


-- 
ldv