| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CALxhOnjR2M1Xd_M4BkhD0qLiRvGVCBipQE77mDn0N8O7k6iwPA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2018 17:03:43 +0530
From: Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@...aro.org>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc: linux-m68k <linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org>,
y2038 Mailman List <y2038@...ts.linaro.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-Arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@...il.com>,
Marcin Juszkiewicz <marcin.juszkiewicz@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] m68k: Replace NR_syscalls macro from asm/unistd.h
Hi Geert,
On Thu, 20 Sep 2018 at 14:54, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Firoz,
>
> On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 10:12 AM Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@...aro.org> wrote:
> > On 18 September 2018 at 15:34, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 9:16 AM Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@...aro.org> wrote:
> > >> On 9 August 2018 at 13:00, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
> > >> > One first comment below...
> > >> >
> > >> > On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 7:16 AM Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@...aro.org> wrote:
> > >> >> NR_syscalls macro holds the number of system call exist in m68k
> > >> >> architecture. This macro is currently the part of asm/unistd.h file.
> > >> >> We have to change the value of NR_syscalls, if we add or delete a
> > >> >> system call.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> One of patch in this patch series has a script which will generate
> > >> >> a uapi header based on syscall.tbl file. The syscall.tbl file
> > >> >> contains the number of system call information. So we have two
> > >> >> option to update NR_syscalls value.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> 1. Update NR_syscalls in asm/unistd.h manually by counting the
> > >> >> no.of system calls. No need to update NR_syscalls untill
> > >> >> we either add a new system call or delete an existing system
> > >> >> call.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> 2. We can keep this feature it above mentioned script, that'll
> > >> >> count the number of syscalls and keep it in a generated file.
> > >> >> In this case we don't need to explicitly update NR_syscalls
> > >> >> in asm/unistd.h file.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> The 2nd option will be the recommended one. For that, I moved the
> > >> >> NR_syscalls macro from asm/unistd.h to uapi/asm/unistd.h. The macro
> > >> >> name also changed form NR_syscalls to __NR_syscalls for making the
> > >> >> name convention same across all architecture. While __NR_syscalls
> > >> >> isn't strictly part of the uapi, having it as part of the generated
> > >> >> header to simplifies the implementation.
> > >> >
> > >> > It can indeed not be part of the UAPI, as UAPI definitions can never change,
> > >> > while new syscalls will be added in the future, increasing the number ;-)
> > >>
> > >> Thanks for your reply :)
> > >> Sorry for the delayed response :(
> > >>
> > >> I would like to keep __NR_syscalls macro to uapi header in order to simplify
> > >> the system call table generation script. Otherwise the __NR_syscalls
> > >> macro need to update manually. That become a problem.
> > >>
> > >> Please check the below implementation in uapi file make sense?
> > >> It is an easy workaround to leave __NR_syscalls macro in uapi/asm/unistd.h
> > >> and enclose it in #ifdef __KERNEL__
> > >>
> > >> ...
> > >> ...
> > >> #define __NR_pwritev2 378
> > >> #define __NR_statx 379
> > >>
> > >> #ifdef __KERNEL__
> > >> #define __NR_syscalls 380
> > >> #endif
> > >> ...
> > >> ...
> > >
> > > #ifdef __KERNEL__ sounds fine to me.
> >
> > I posted similar script for 10 different architectures. I got few good review
> > from the maintainers and it will be applicable for all the
> > architectures including
> > m68k. There are few area which I identified need to improve. This will take
> > couple of days.
> >
> > But it will be very helpful if you can perform the boot test on the
> > actual platform
> > and share the result.
>
> Builds and boots fine on ARAnyM (virtual Atari).
Thanks for the support :)
>
> So for the full series:
> Tested-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
>
> However, I noticed the following effective difference between the old
> arch/m68k/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h and the new generated
> arch/m68k/include/generated/uapi/asm/unistd_32.h:
>
> -/*#define __NR_break 17*/
> -/*#define __NR_stty 31*/
> -/*#define __NR_gtty 32*/
> -/*#define __NR_ftime 35*/
> -/*#define __NR_prof 44*/
> -/*#define __NR_lock 53*/
> -/*#define __NR_mpx 56*/
> -/*#define __NR_ulimit 58*/
> -/*#define __NR_oldolduname 59*/
> -/*#define __NR_profil 98*/
> -/*#define __NR_ioperm 101*/
> -/*#define __NR_olduname 109*/
> -/*#define __NR_iopl 110*/ /* not supported */
> -/*#define __NR_idle 112*/ /* Obsolete */
> -/*#define __NR_vm86 113*/ /* not supported */
> -/*#define __NR_afs_syscall 137*/ /* Syscall for Andrew File System */
> -/*#define __NR_vserver 278*/
> +#define __NR_break 17
> +#define __NR_stty 31
> +#define __NR_gtty 32
> +#define __NR_ftime 35
> +#define __NR_prof 44
> +#define __NR_lock 53
> +#define __NR_mpx 56
> +#define __NR_ulimit 58
> +#define __NR_oldolduname 59
> +#define __NR_profil 98
> +#define __NR_ioperm 101
> +#define __NR_olduname 109
> +#define __NR_iopl 110
> +#define __NR_idle 112
> +#define __NR_vm86 113
> +#define __NR_afs_syscall 137
> +#define __NR_vserver 278
>
> Given userspace code may contain checks for the presence of these
> defines, I think they should not be present.
My patch series had some different way to handle the above one. Some
how the plan got changed and missed it :(
I posted v2 patch series Thursday evening. This contain some modi-
fications suggested by different architecture maintainers including
you.
Please help us to review the patch series and please perform boot
test on the actual platform.
Thanks
Firoz
>
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
>
> Geert
>
> --
> Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org
>
> In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
> when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
> -- Linus Torvalds
Powered by blists - more mailing lists