On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 5:47 PM, Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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).
HOWEVER.
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
work.
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-s390" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
