Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 8 Dec 2015 06:01:48 +0100 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [PSEUDOPATCH] rename is_compat_task |
| |
* Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 05:36:49AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > So are there any deep objections to doing this rename in a single, quick, > > pain-minimized fashion right at the end of the next merge window, when the > > amount of pending patches in various maintainer trees is at a cyclical > > minimum? We can also keep an is_compat_task() migratory define for one more > > cycle just in case. > > Again, what about sparc? There we have both 64bit and 32bit syscalls possible > to issue from the same process *and* no indication which trap had been used; how > do you implement is_compat_syscall() there? There's a TIF_32BIT, which is used > by mmap() and friends, signal delivery, etc., but that's not a matter of which > syscall flavour had been issued. Said that, arch/sparc doesn't use > is_compat_task(); it's open-coded everywhere...
Hm, so if Sparc has no notion of compat-ness of the system call then how does it implement runtime compat checks, such as AUDIT_ARCH et al?
Thanks,
Ingo
| |