linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 05/13] riscv: compat: syscall: Add compat_sys_call

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]

Message-ID: <CAK8P3a2XOVYB1Fm5TBdjtKx9DXoG93Zrw7TiquYL_Zy916dLwQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 21 Dec 2021 18:15:37 +0100
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     Guo Ren <guoren@...nel.org>
Cc:     Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Anup Patel <anup.patel@....com>,
        gregkh <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        liush <liush@...winnertech.com>, wefu@...hat.com,
        Drew Fustini <drew@...gleboard.org>, wangjunqiang@...as.ac.cn,
        Wei Wu (吴伟) <lazyparser@...il.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-riscv <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
        linux-csky@...r.kernel.org, Guo Ren <guoren@...ux.alibaba.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/13] riscv: compat: syscall: Add compat_sys_call_table implementation

On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 5:35 PM <guoren@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> From: Guo Ren <guoren@...ux.alibaba.com>
>
> Implement compat_syscall_table.c with compat_sys_call_table & fixup
> system call such as truncate64,pread64,fallocate which need two
> regs to indicate 64bit-arg (copied from arm64).
>
> Signed-off-by: Guo Ren <guoren@...ux.alibaba.com>
> ---
>  arch/riscv/include/asm/syscall.h         |  3 +
>  arch/riscv/kernel/compat_syscall_table.c | 84 ++++++++++++++++++++++++

Same here, I think most of these should go next to the actual syscalls, with the
duplicates removed from other platforms,

> +#define __SYSCALL_COMPAT
> +#undef __LP64__

What is the #undef for?

> +SYSCALL_DEFINE6(mmap2, unsigned long, addr, unsigned long, len,
> +       unsigned long, prot, unsigned long, flags,
> +       unsigned long, fd, unsigned long, offset)
> +{
> +       if ((prot & PROT_WRITE) && (prot & PROT_EXEC))
> +               if (unlikely(!(prot & PROT_READ)))
> +                       return -EINVAL;
> +
> +       return ksys_mmap_pgoff(addr, len, prot, flags, fd, offset);
> +}

This is one that we may have to deal with separately, introducing
sys_mmap_pgoff() was a mistake in my opinion, and we should just have
added a sys_mmap2() for all architectures that don't explicitly override it.

       Arnd