[lkml]   [2009]   [Oct]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: is avoiding compat ioctls possible?
On Wednesday 28 October 2009, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > However some architectures need special operations on compat pointers
> > > (s390 iirc), but if you don't support those it might be reasonable
> > > to not support that.
> >
> > s390 has to sign extend all 32-bit compat process pointers when
> > processing them in the 64-bit s390 kernel. I think one other
> > architecture has this kind of situation too.
> Which other architure? I reviewed all the definitions in tree
> and don't see any other than s390 doing magic there.

I'm also pretty sure that s390 is the only one needing this, I
added the compat_ptr stuff initially.

Note that a cast from pointer to unsigned long to u64 and back
in C does the correct 31 to 64 bit extension, which btw is not
a sign-extend but a unsigned extend clearing the upper 33 bits.

The easier rule to remember should be to always to compat_ptr()
on any pointer coming from user space, and to avoid pointers in
data structures where possible, as DaveM pointed out.

Arnd <><

 \ /
  Last update: 2009-10-28 11:29    [W:0.498 / U:2.116 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site