[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACRpkdYkL2=gkBvbHO514rnppLdHgsXwi0==6Ovq43kSZqEvUQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2020 11:41:24 +0200
From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Russell King <rmk@....linux.org.uk>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/9] ARM: syscall: always store thread_info->syscall
Hi Arnd,
help me out here because I feel vaguely stupid...
On Mon, Sep 7, 2020 at 5:38 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
> {
> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OABI_COMPAT))
> + return task_thread_info(task)->syscall & ~__NR_OABI_SYSCALL_BASE;
Where __NR_OABI_SYSCALL_BASE is
#define __NR_OABI_SYSCALL_BASE 0x900000
So you will end up with sycall number & FF6FFFFF
masking off bits 20 and 23.
I suppose this is based on this:
> bics r10, r10, #0xff000000
> + str r10, [tsk, #TI_SYSCALL]
OK we mask off bits 24-31 before we store this.
> bic scno, scno, #0xff000000 @ mask off SWI op-code
> + str scno, [tsk, #TI_SYSCALL]
And here too.
> eor scno, scno, #__NR_SYSCALL_BASE @ check OS number
And then happens that which will ... I don't know really.
Exclusive or with 0x9000000 is not immediately intuitive
evident to me, I suppose it is for everyone else... :/
I need some idea how this numberspace is managed in order to
understand the code so I can review it, I guess it all makes perfect
sense but I need some background here.
Thanks,
Linus Walleij
Powered by blists - more mailing lists