[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKwvOdn2Tm6C4Q-GWfh7e2N8rQKAHYyGM9Cn6vb1CUzCORiaAg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2024 08:50:19 -0800
From: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Tanzir Hasan <tanzirh@...gle.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Nick Desaulniers <nnn@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/syscalls: shrink entry/syscall_32.i via IWYU
On Wed, Dec 27, 2023 at 4:45 PM Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 27, 2023 at 11:34:44PM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
>
> > That's _it_. The same goes for syscall_64.c and syscall_x32.c.
> > Oh, and lose the __visible/asmlinkage junk in there - none of that
> > stuff is used from asm these days. See the patch below -
> > Untested But Should Work(tm):
>
> Unfortunately, there's this in kernel/trace/trace_syscalls.c:
>
> unsigned long __init __weak arch_syscall_addr(int nr)
> {
> return (unsigned long)sys_call_table[nr];
> }
>
> How is that supposed to work for anything biarch? Including
> amd64 with CONFIG_COMPAT enabled?
commit f431b634f24d ("tracing/syscalls: Allow archs to ignore tracing
compat syscalls")
added a comment block about ARCH_TRACE_IGNORE_COMPAT_SYSCALLS, which
is defined for x86 in arch/x86/include/asm/ftrace.h.
The implementation of arch_syscall_addr for mips is quite complex;
dependent on quite a few different configs.
--
Thanks,
~Nick Desaulniers
Powered by blists - more mailing lists