[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALCETrXoxRBTon8+jrYcbruYVUZASwgd-kzH-A96DGvT7gLXVA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 10:45:57 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
Cc: Dmitry Safonov <dsafonov@...tuozzo.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Dmitry Safonov <0x7f454c46@...il.com>,
Adam Borowski <kilobyte@...band.pl>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Andrei Vagin <avagin@...il.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] x86/mm: set x32 syscall bit in SET_PERSONALITY()
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 10:17 AM, Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 07:37:12PM +0300, Dmitry Safonov wrote:
> ...
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/process_64.c b/arch/x86/kernel/process_64.c
>> index d6b784a5520d..d3d4d9abcaf8 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/process_64.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/process_64.c
>> @@ -519,8 +519,14 @@ void set_personality_ia32(bool x32)
>> if (current->mm)
>> current->mm->context.ia32_compat = TIF_X32;
>> current->personality &= ~READ_IMPLIES_EXEC;
>> - /* in_compat_syscall() uses the presence of the x32
>> - syscall bit flag to determine compat status */
>> + /*
>> + * in_compat_syscall() uses the presence of the x32
>> + * syscall bit flag to determine compat status.
>> + * On the bitness of syscall relies x86 mmap() code,
>> + * so set x32 syscall bit right here to make
>> + * in_compat_syscall() work during exec().
>> + */
>> + task_pt_regs(current)->orig_ax |= __X32_SYSCALL_BIT;
>> current->thread.status &= ~TS_COMPAT;
>
> Hi! I must admit I didn't follow close the overall series (so can't
> comment much here :) but I have a slightly unrelated question -- is
> there a way to figure out if task is running in x32 mode say with
> some ptrace or procfs sign?
You should be able to figure out of a *syscall* is x32 by simply
looking at bit 30 in the syscall number. (This is unlike i386, which
is currently not reflected in ptrace.)
Do we actually have an x32 per-task mode at all? If so, maybe we can
just remove it on top of Dmitry's series.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists