On Wednesday 06 January 2016 17:10:47 Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 10:12:20PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Tuesday 05 January 2016 18:26:57 Yury Norov wrote:
> > > > So the calling conventions avoid the problem of being able to set
> > > > the upper bits from malicious use
On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 10:12:20PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 05 January 2016 18:26:57 Yury Norov wrote:
> > > So the calling conventions avoid the problem of being able to set
> > > the upper bits from malicious user space when the kernel assumes they
> > > are zeroed out (we had sec
On Tuesday 05 January 2016 18:26:57 Yury Norov wrote:
> > So the calling conventions avoid the problem of being able to set
> > the upper bits from malicious user space when the kernel assumes they
> > are zeroed out (we had security bugs in this area, before we introduced
> > SYSCALL_DEFINEx()), b
On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 09:50:52PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thursday 17 December 2015 12:14:20 Andrew Pinski wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > On Thursday 17 December 2015 18:27:53 Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > >> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 12:42:38AM +0300,
On Wednesday 23 December 2015, Yury Norov wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 11:31:57PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Tuesday 15 December 2015, Yury Norov wrote:
> > > +
> > > +#define compat_sys_open_by_handle_at sys_open_by_handle_at
> > > +#define compat_sys_openat sys_openat
>
On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 11:31:57PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 15 December 2015, Yury Norov wrote:
> > +
> > +#define compat_sys_open_by_handle_at sys_open_by_handle_at
> > +#define compat_sys_openat sys_openat
> > +
>
> One more thing I just remembered: I think we want
On Tuesday 15 December 2015, Yury Norov wrote:
> +
> +#define compat_sys_open_by_handle_at sys_open_by_handle_at
> +#define compat_sys_openat sys_openat
> +
One more thing I just remembered: I think we want this behavior for all new
32-bit architectures, it was a bug to call compat_
On Monday 21 December 2015, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 01:47:55PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Friday 18 December 2015 11:42:19 Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > > 2. Follow the PCS up to glibc and get glibc to zero the top part (not
> > >always safe with hand-written assem
On Monday 21 December 2015, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote:
>
> > On 18 Dec 2015, at 13:47, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >
> >> 3. Follow the PCS up to glibc but always pass syscall arguments in W
> >> registers, like AArch32 compat support (the least preferred option,
> >> the only advantage is a sing
> On 18 Dec 2015, at 13:47, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>
>> 3. Follow the PCS up to glibc but always pass syscall arguments in W
>> registers, like AArch32 compat support (the least preferred option,
>> the only advantage is a single wrapper for all syscalls but it would
>> be doing unnecessary
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 01:47:55PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Friday 18 December 2015 11:42:19 Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:14:20PM -0800, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> > > Well (just like LP64 on AARCH64), when passing a 32bit value to a
> > > function, the upper 32bits are
On Friday 18 December 2015 11:42:19 Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:14:20PM -0800, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> > Well (just like LP64 on AARCH64), when passing a 32bit value to a
> > function, the upper 32bits are undefined. I ran into this when I was
> > debugging the GCC go librar
(cc'ing Marcus for more insight on the tools side)
On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:14:20PM -0800, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Thursday 17 December 2015 18:27:53 Catalin Marinas wrote:
> >> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 12:42:38AM +0300, Yury Norov wro
On Thursday 17 December 2015 12:14:20 Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Thursday 17 December 2015 18:27:53 Catalin Marinas wrote:
> >> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 12:42:38AM +0300, Yury Norov wrote:
> >
> >> > +#define compat_sys_lookup_dcookie s
On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thursday 17 December 2015 18:27:53 Catalin Marinas wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 12:42:38AM +0300, Yury Norov wrote:
>
>> > +#define compat_sys_lookup_dcookie sys_lookup_dcookie
>> > +#define compat_sys_pread64 sys_pr
On Thursday 17 December 2015 18:27:53 Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 12:42:38AM +0300, Yury Norov wrote:
> > +#define compat_sys_lookup_dcookie sys_lookup_dcookie
> > +#define compat_sys_pread64 sys_pread64
> > +#define compat_sys_pwrite64sys_pwrite64
On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 12:42:38AM +0300, Yury Norov wrote:
> +/* Using non-compat syscalls where necessary */
> +#define compat_sys_fadvise64_64sys_fadvise64_64
> +#define compat_sys_fallocate sys_fallocate
> +#define compat_sys_ftruncate64 sys_ftruncate
I initially thou
On Wednesday 16 December 2015 00:42:38 Yury Norov wrote:
> +/* Using non-compat syscalls where necessary */
> +#define compat_sys_fadvise64_64sys_fadvise64_64
> +#define compat_sys_fallocate sys_fallocate
> +#define compat_sys_ftruncate64 sys_ftruncate
> +#define compat_sy
From: Andrew Pinski
Add a separate syscall-table for ILP32, which dispatches either to native
LP64 system call implementation or to compat-syscalls, as appropriate.
Reviewed-by: David Daney
Signed-off-by: Philipp Tomsich
Signed-off-by: Christoph Muellner
Signed-off-by: Yury Norov
Signed-off-
19 matches
Mail list logo