netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 13/29] arch: add split IPC system calls where needed

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: <20190118171830.quvvwdgbuhq2nqrh@lt-gp.iram.es>
Date:   Fri, 18 Jan 2019 18:18:30 +0100
From:   Gabriel Paubert <paubert@...m.es>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:     y2038@...ts.linaro.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
        dalias@...c.org, linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-sh@...r.kernel.org, catalin.marinas@....com,
        will.deacon@....com, jcmvbkbc@...il.com, deepa.kernel@...il.com,
        hpa@...or.com, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, deller@....de, x86@...nel.org,
        linux@...linux.org.uk, mingo@...hat.com, geert@...ux-m68k.org,
        firoz.khan@...aro.org, mattst88@...il.com, fenghua.yu@...el.com,
        heiko.carstens@...ibm.com, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org, luto@...nel.org,
        tglx@...utronix.de, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        monstr@...str.eu, tony.luck@...el.com,
        linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, paul.burton@...s.com,
        ebiederm@...ssion.com, linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org,
        schwidefsky@...ibm.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, davem@...emloft.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 13/29] arch: add split IPC system calls where needed

On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 05:18:19PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> The IPC system call handling is highly inconsistent across architectures,
> some use sys_ipc, some use separate calls, and some use both.  We also
> have some architectures that require passing IPC_64 in the flags, and
> others that set it implicitly.
> 
> For the additon of a y2083 safe semtimedop() system call, I chose to only

It's not critical, but there are two typos in that line: 
additon -> addition
2083 -> 2038

	Gabriel

> support the separate entry points, but that requires first supporting
> the regular ones with their own syscall numbers.
> 
> The IPC_64 is now implied by the new semctl/shmctl/msgctl system
> calls even on the architectures that require passing it with the ipc()
> multiplexer.
> 
> I'm not adding the new semtimedop() or semop() on 32-bit architectures,
> those will get implemented using the new semtimedop_time64() version
> that gets added along with the other time64 calls.
> Three 64-bit architectures (powerpc, s390 and sparc) get semtimedop().
> 
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>