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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2020 18:00:03 +0200 From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, "the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "open list:BROADCOM NVRAM DRIVER" <linux-mips@...r.kernel.org>, Parisc List <linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org>, linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>, linux-s390 <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>, sparclinux <sparclinux@...r.kernel.org>, linux-block <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>, linux-scsi <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>, Linux FS-devel Mailing List <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-aio <linux-aio@...ck.org>, io-uring@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, keyrings@...r.kernel.org, LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] kernel: add a PF_FORCE_COMPAT flag On Sun, Sep 20, 2020 at 5:15 PM Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 02:45:25PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > Add a flag to force processing a syscall as a compat syscall. This is > > required so that in_compat_syscall() works for I/O submitted by io_uring > > helper threads on behalf of compat syscalls. > > Al doesn't like this much, but my suggestion is to introduce two new > opcodes -- IORING_OP_READV32 and IORING_OP_WRITEV32. The compat code > can translate IORING_OP_READV to IORING_OP_READV32 and then the core > code can know what that user pointer is pointing to. How is that different from the current approach of storing the ABI as a flag in ctx->compat? Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists