On Sun, 11 Feb 2007, Heiko Carstens wrote: > On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 12:15:24PM -0800, Davide Libenzi wrote: > > > > Add epoll compat_ code to kernel/compat.c. IA64 and ARM-OABI are currently > > using their own version of epoll compat_ code and they could probably wire > > to the new common code. Patch over 2.6.20. > > + * epoll (fs/eventpoll.c) compat bits follow ... > > + */ > > +struct compat_epoll_event { > > + u32 events; > > + u32 data[2]; > > +}; > > + > >[...] > > + > > + * We need the compat layer over the epoll_event structure, only if the > > offset > > + * of the __u64 data member is not 4 (size of the events member that > > precedes the > > + * data one). > > + */ > > +#define EPOLL_NEED_EVENT_COMPAT() (offsetof(struct epoll_event, data) != 4) > > With > > struct epoll_event { > __u32 events; > __u64 data; > }; > > this won't work on s390. offsetof(struct epoll_event, data) is 8 on both > 31 bit and 64 bit. So it will do the conversion and corrupt all the data. > Actually we would only need the compat conversion for the sigset_t stuff.
Yup, that's broken not only on s390, but on every arch with alignof(u64) == 8 in 32 bits mode. The assumption was that for cases like the above, you simply wouldn't wire the compat_ version. That is true for epoll_wait and epoll_ctl, where the only need for compat was the "struct epoll_event". But that's not true for epoll_pwait, since this one needs to be wired because of the sigset_t. On top of sigset_t, epoll_pwait may need "struct epoll_event" translation. Now, that *really* sux because two versions of compat_epoll_pwait are needed, once that does sigset_t translation only, and one that does sigset_t + "struct epoll_event". > But then again I thought most 32 bit architectures would add a 4 byte > pad between events and data, no? i386 does not, for example ;) > Maybe we need some arch dependent struct compat_epoll_event and have > something like > #define EPOLL_NEED_EVENT_COMPAT() \ > (offsetof(struct epoll_event, data) != offsetof(struct compat_epoll_event, > data)) > > ? No, it won't work. Unless there is (or we define) a per-arch macro that tells us how the 32 bits mode align an u64, I'm afraid we can't do any smart tricks and we need to have the double compat_epoll_pwait. - Davide - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/