On Tuesday 16 December 2008, Kyle McMartin wrote:
> > I'd prefer to have the ordering coded explicitly instead, like this:
> >
> > asmlinkage int compat_sys_pwritev(unsigned long fd,
> > const struct compat_iovec __user *vec, unsigned long vlen,
> > unsigned pos_low, unsigned pos_high)
> > {
> > loff_t pos = pos_low | (loff_t)pos_high << 32;
> > [ ... ]
> >
>
> Sadly this isn't possible without a wrapper unless you can guarantee
> it was passed low high instead of high low. Unless you munge it in
> userspace, you can't.
>
Exactly, we have to munge it in userspace anyway because of the
argument ordering requirement we get if we pass it as a single u64.
I vote for the explicit split as well, this will give us a straightforward
wrapper in user space, unlike the swapped arguments that are just asking
for trouble, and will make it easy to have a common compat_sys_pwritev
function.
Arnd <><
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
