On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 5:20 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 4:59 PM, Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> I suspect you want to use __kernel_ulong_t here instead of a raw
>> unsigned long. If nothing else it seems inconsistent to use typedefs
>> in one half of the structure and no typedefs in the other half.
>
> Good catch, there is definitely something wrong here, but I think using
> __kernel_ulong_t for all members would also be wrong, as that
> still changes the layout on x32, which effectively is
>
> struct msqid64_ds {
> ipc64_perm msg_perm;
> u64 msg_stime;
> u32 __unused1;
> /* 32 bit implict padding */
> u64 msg_rtime;
> u32 __unused2;
> /* 32 bit implict padding */
> u64 msg_ctime;
> u32 __unused3;
> /* 32 bit implict padding */
> __kernel_pid_t shm_cpid; /* pid of creator */
> __kernel_pid_t shm_lpid; /* pid of last operator */
> ....
> };
>
> The choices here would be to either use a mix of
> __kernel_ulong_t and unsigned long, or taking the x32
> version back into arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/ so the
> generic version at least makes some sense.
>
> I can't use __kernel_time_t for the lower half on 32-bit
> since it really should be unsigned.
After thinking about it some more, I conclude that the structure is simply
incorrect on x32: The __kernel_ulong_t usage was introduced in 2013
in commit b9cd5ca22d67 ("uapi: Use __kernel_ulong_t in struct
msqid64_ds") and apparently was correct initially as __BITS_PER_LONG
evaluated to 64, but it broke with commit f4b4aae18288 ("x86/headers/uapi:
Fix __BITS_PER_LONG value for x32 builds") that changed the value
of __BITS_PER_LONG and introduced the extra padding in 2015.
The same change apparently also broke a lot of other definitions, e.g.
$ echo "#include <linux/types.h>" | gcc -mx32 -E -xc - | grep -A3
__kernel_size_t
typedef unsigned int __kernel_size_t;
typedef int __kernel_ssize_t;
typedef int __kernel_ptrdiff_t;
Those used to be defined as 'unsigned long long' and 'long long'
respectively, so now all kernel interfaces using those on x32
became incompatible!
Arnd
