[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181210124059.GA11942@altlinux.org>
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2018 15:40:59 +0300
From: "Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@...linux.org>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
lineprinter@...linux.org, Eugene Syromiatnikov <esyr@...hat.com>,
linux-m68k <linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 13/25] m68k: add asm/syscall.h
Hi Geert,
On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 09:45:42AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Dmitry,
>
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 5:30 AM Dmitry V. Levin <ldv@...linux.org> wrote:
> > syscall_get_* functions are required to be implemented on all
> > architectures in order to extend the generic ptrace API with
> > PTRACE_GET_SYSCALL_INFO request.
> >
> > This introduces asm/syscall.h on m68k implementing all 5 syscall_get_*
> > functions as documented in asm-generic/syscall.h: syscall_get_nr,
> > syscall_get_arguments, syscall_get_error, syscall_get_return_value,
> > and syscall_get_arch.
> >
> > Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
> > Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
> > Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
> > Cc: Elvira Khabirova <lineprinter@...linux.org>
> > Cc: Eugene Syromyatnikov <esyr@...hat.com>
> > Cc: linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org
> > Signed-off-by: Dmitry V. Levin <ldv@...linux.org>
> > ---
> >
> > Notes:
> > v5: added syscall_get_nr, syscall_get_arguments, syscall_get_error,
> > and syscall_get_return_value
> > v1: added syscall_get_arch
>
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/arch/m68k/include/asm/syscall.h
> > @@ -0,0 +1,39 @@
>
> > +static inline void
> > +syscall_get_arguments(struct task_struct *task, struct pt_regs *regs,
> > + unsigned int i, unsigned int n, unsigned long *args)
> > +{
> > + BUG_ON(i + n > 6);
>
> Does this have to crash the kernel?
This is what most of other architectures do, but we could choose
a softer approach, e.g. use WARN_ON_ONCE instead.
> Perhaps you can return an error code instead?
That would be problematic given the signature of this function
and the nature of the potential bug which would most likely be a usage error.
--
ldv
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (802 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists