On 1/16/19 3:45 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 3:56 AM Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> @@ -132,4 +139,12 @@ struct io_uring_register_buffers {
>> __u32 nr_iovecs;
>> };
>>
>> +struct io_uring_register_files {
>> + union {
>> + __s32 *fds;
>> + __u64 pad;
>> + };
>> + __u32 nr_fds;
>> +};
>
> I think you should either remove the pad field here, or pass the pointer
> using a __u64 argument itself. With the current definition, the ioctl
> command code is the same between 32-bit and 64-bit architectures
> (since the length is the same on anything other than x86), but the
> structures are incompatible.
Ah ok, I think I'm starting to follow. Thanks Arnd, that's useful.
I'll make the changes throughout the structs.
> I would also suggest adding an explicit 32-bit pad field at the end
> of the structure, to avoid the implicit padding on non-i386 machines.
That's a good point, I'll make that change, that was an oversight.
--
Jens Axboe
