[lkml]   [2018]   [Mar]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 5:47 PM, Al Viro <> wrote:
> Linus, Dominik - how do you plan dealing with that fun?

Secretly, I was hoping to kill x32, because it's not being used afaik.

More realistically, I was thinking we'd just use a separate table or
system calls, and generate different versions.

In fact, you can see exactly that in my WIP branch, except it uses the
wrong name.

So see the "WIP-syscall" branch in my normal git kernel repo, and in
particular the patch to <linux/syscalls.h>, which generates
"sys_x64##name" and "sys_i86##name()" inline functions that do that
mapping correcty for native x86-64, and for the (misnamed) x32 cases.

So there are three different cases:

- native: sys_x64_name() generated by SYSCALL_DEFINEx()

- compat -bit: compat_sys_i86_name() generated by COMPAT_SYSCALL_DEFINEx()

- x32: sys_i86_name() generated by SYSCALL_DEFINEx().

and then I actually changed the names in the tables (ie in
arch/x86/entry/syscalls/syscall_64.tbl etc).


I didn't actually test any of the compat or x32 ones, and the way I
did it there also was no type-checking or other automated catching of
getting it wrong. So it's almost certainly completely buggy, but the
_intent_ is there and there is a remote possibility that it might even


 \ /
  Last update: 2018-03-26 08:16    [W:0.089 / U:7.464 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site