linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] xtensa: add __NR_syscalls along with __NR_syscall

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: <CAMo8BfJGWgJrsg858nwO_845HQOSMNm4AxEqjEjVsSMZMG1Gzw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 13 Nov 2018 15:49:29 -0800
From:   Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@...il.com>
To:     Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@...aro.org>
Cc:     Chris Zankel <chris@...kel.net>, linux-xtensa@...ux-xtensa.org,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@...b.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Kate Stewart <kstewart@...uxfoundation.org>,
        y2038@...ts.linaro.org, LKML <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@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] xtensa: add __NR_syscalls along with __NR_syscall_count

Hi Firoz,

I have one more question:

On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 2:20 AM Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@...aro.org> wrote:
> The 2nd option will be the recommended one. For that, I
> added the __NR_syscalls macro in uapi/asm/unistd.h along
> with __NR_syscall_count asm/unistd.h. The macro __NR_sys-
> calls also added 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. We also need to enclose
> this macro with #ifdef __KERNEL__ to avoid side effects.

Looking at the include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h I see that
__NR_syscalls is not guarded by the #ifdef __KERNEL__,
why should it be guarded for xtensa?

If we remove __NR_syscall_count from the uapi header I'd
suggest dropping it completely and switching its two current
users to __NR_syscalls.

-- 
Thanks.
-- Max