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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20190121115705.GB4020@osiris> Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2019 12:57:05 +0100 From: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com> 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, mattst88@...il.com, linux@...linux.org.uk, catalin.marinas@....com, will.deacon@....com, tony.luck@...el.com, fenghua.yu@...el.com, geert@...ux-m68k.org, monstr@...str.eu, paul.burton@...s.com, deller@....de, benh@...nel.crashing.org, mpe@...erman.id.au, schwidefsky@...ibm.com, dalias@...c.org, davem@...emloft.net, luto@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com, x86@...nel.org, jcmvbkbc@...il.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, deepa.kernel@...il.com, ebiederm@...ssion.com, firoz.khan@...aro.org, linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org, linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-sh@...r.kernel.org, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org 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 > 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> > --- > One aspect here that might be a bit controversial is the use of > the same system call numbers across all architectures, synchronizing > all of them with the x86-32 numbers. With the new syscall.tbl > files, I hope we can just keep doing that in the future, and no > longer require the architecture maintainers to assign a number. > > This is mainly useful for implementers of the C libraries: if > we can add future system calls everywhere at the same time, using > a particular version of the kernel headers also guarantees that > the system call number macro is visible. > --- > arch/m68k/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl | 11 +++++++++++ > arch/mips/kernel/syscalls/syscall_o32.tbl | 11 +++++++++++ > arch/powerpc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl | 13 +++++++++++++ > arch/s390/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl | 12 ++++++++++++ > arch/sh/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl | 11 +++++++++++ > arch/sparc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl | 12 ++++++++++++ > arch/x86/entry/syscalls/syscall_32.tbl | 11 +++++++++++ > 7 files changed, 81 insertions(+) For the s390 bits: Acked-by: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists