[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170914202429.GB16764@altlinux.org>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2017 23:24:30 +0300
From: "Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@...linux.org>
To: Eugene Syromyatnikov <evgsyr@...il.com>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/asm/64: do not clear high 32 bits of syscall number
when CONFIG_X86_X32=y
On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 07:40:43PM +0000, Eugene Syromyatnikov wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 4:49 PM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> wrote:
> > IOW, why do we want to silently ignore the upper bits in $rax ?
>
> By the way, they are ignored elsewhere, in audit[1] or seccomp[2], for example.
>
> [1] include/linux/audit.h
> [2] include/uapi/linux/seccomp.h, definition of struct seccomp_data
Yes, unfortunately, they are ignored later, but that is another story.
--
ldv
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (802 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists