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  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]
Date:   Tue, 22 Jan 2019 10:37:12 +0100
From:   Arnd Bergmann <>
To:     Andy Lutomirski <>
Cc:     y2038 Mailman List <>,
        Linux API <>,
        LKML <>,
        linux-arch <>,
        Thomas Gleixner <>,
        Ingo Molnar <>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <>, X86 ML <>,
        alpha <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 29/29] y2038: add 64-bit time_t syscalls to all 32-bit architectures

On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 7:50 PM Andy Lutomirski <> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 8:25 AM Arnd Bergmann <> wrote:
> I have a patch that I'll send soon to make x32 use its own table.  As
> far as I'm concerned, 547 is *it*.  548 is just a normal number and is
> not special.  But let's please not reuse 512..547 for other purposes
> on x86 variants -- that way lies even more confusion, IMO.

(trimming Cc list, as this is getting a little off-topic most most)

Just so I understand: do you mean duplicating the .tbl file, or just
the resulting table of entry points?

In either way, how will that work with the new io_uring_setup()
system call that will have to use the compat entry point?
Are you planning to use the same syscall number as x86_64
but point it to the compat function, or do we still need a new
syscall number for x32 in the regular range?


Powered by blists - more mailing lists