linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: use the correct function type in 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 3 May 2019 10:02:42 -0700
From:   Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>
To:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: use the correct function type in
 SYSCALL_DEFINE0

Hi Mark,

On Fri, May 03, 2019 at 11:21:28AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> Generally, this makes sense, but I'm not sure that this is complete.
> 
> IIUC this introduces a new type mismatch with sys_ni_syscall() in some
> cases.

Thanks for the review. You're correct, sys_ni_syscall needs to be fixed
too. I'll include this in v2.

> We probably need that to use SYSCALL_DEFINE0(), and maybe have a
> ksys_ni_syscall() for in-kernel wrappers.

Why would we need ksys_ni_syscall? It seems something like this should
be sufficient:

  asmlinkage long sys_ni_syscall(void);

  SYSCALL_DEFINE0(ni_syscall)
  {
          return sys_ni_syscall();
  }

Sami