Hello Arnd,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 10:46 AM Richard Palethorpe <rpalethorpe@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Richard Palethorpe <rpalethorpe@xxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> >
>> > Then the output is:
>> >
>> > [ 11.252268] io_pgetevents(f7f19000, 4294967295, 1, ...)
>> > [ 11.252401] comparing 4294967295 <= 1
>> > io_pgetevents02.c:114: TPASS: invalid min_nr: io_pgetevents() failed as expected: EINVAL (22)
>> > [ 11.252610] io_pgetevents(f7f19000, 1, 4294967295, ...)
>> > [ 11.252748] comparing 1 <= 4294967295
>> > io_pgetevents02.c:103: TFAIL: invalid max_nr: io_pgetevents() passed unexpectedly
>>
>> and below is the macro expansion for the automatically generated 32bit to
>> 64bit io_pgetevents. I believe it is casting u32 to s64, which appears
>> to mean there is no sign extension. I don't know if this is the expected
>> behaviour?
>
> Thank you for digging through this, I meant to already reply once more yesterday
> but didn't get around to that.
Thanks, no problem. I suppose this will effect other systemcalls as
well. Which if nothing else is a pain for testing.
>
>> __typeof(__builtin_choose_expr(
>> (__builtin_types_compatible_p(typeof((long)0), typeof(0LL)) ||
>> __builtin_types_compatible_p(typeof((long)0), typeof(0ULL))),
>> 0LL, 0L)) min_nr,
>> __typeof(__builtin_choose_expr(
>> (__builtin_types_compatible_p(typeof((long)0), typeof(0LL)) ||
>> __builtin_types_compatible_p(typeof((long)0), typeof(0ULL))),
>> 0LL, 0L)) nr,
>
> The part that I remembered is in arch/s390/include/asm/syscall_wrapper.h,
> which uses this version instead:
>
> #define __SC_COMPAT_CAST(t, a) \
> ({ \
> long __ReS = a; \
> \
> BUILD_BUG_ON((sizeof(t) > 4) && !__TYPE_IS_L(t) && \
> !__TYPE_IS_UL(t) && !__TYPE_IS_PTR(t) && \
> !__TYPE_IS_LL(t)); \
> if (__TYPE_IS_L(t)) \
> __ReS = (s32)a; \
> if (__TYPE_IS_UL(t)) \
> __ReS = (u32)a; \
> if (__TYPE_IS_PTR(t)) \
> __ReS = a & 0x7fffffff; \
> if (__TYPE_IS_LL(t)) \
> return -ENOSYS; \
> (t)__ReS; \
> })
>
> This also takes care of s390-specific pointer conversion, which is the
> reason for needing an architecture-specific wrapper, but I suppose the
> handling of signed arguments as done in s390 should also be done
> everywhere else.
>
> I also noticed that only x86 and s390 even have separate entry
> points for normal syscalls when called in compat mode, while
> the others all just zero the upper halves of the registers in the
> low-level entry code and then call the native entry point.
>
> Arnd
It looks to me like aarch64 also has something similar? At any rate, I
can try to fix it for x86 and investigate what else might be effected.
--
Thank you,
Richard.
