linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] x86: add __X32_COND

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]

Date:   Sat, 19 Sep 2020 10:14:13 -0700
From:   hpa@...or.com
To:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
CC:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Eric Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, kexec@...ts.infradead.org,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] x86: add __X32_COND_SYSCALL() macro

On September 19, 2020 9:23:22 AM PDT, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> wrote:
>On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 10:35 PM Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
>wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 03:24:36PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> > sys_move_pages() is an optional syscall, and once we remove
>> > the compat version of it in favor of the native one with an
>> > in_compat_syscall() check, the x32 syscall table refers to
>> > a __x32_sys_move_pages symbol that may not exist when the
>> > syscall is disabled.
>> >
>> > Change the COND_SYSCALL() definition on x86 to also include
>> > the redirection for x32.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
>>
>> Adding the x86 maintainers and Brian Gerst.  Brian proposed another
>> problem to the mess that most of the compat syscall handlers used by
>> x32 here:
>>
>>    https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/6/16/664
>>
>> hpa didn't particularly like it, but with your and my pending series
>> we'll soon use more native than compat syscalls for x32, so something
>> will need to change..
>
>I'm fine with either solution.

My main objection was naming. x64 is a widely used synonym for x86-64, and so that is confusing.

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.