On Sat, Sep 19, 2020 at 05:14:41PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > > 2) have you counted the syscalls that do and do not need that? > > No. Might be illuminating... > > 3) how many of those realistically *can* be unified with their > > compat counterparts? [hint: ioctl(2) cannot] > > There would be no requirement to unify anything. The idea is that > we'd get rid of all the global state flags. _What_ global state flags? When you have separate SYSCALL_DEFINE3(ioctl...) and COMPAT_SYSCALL_DEFINE3(ioctl...), there's no flags at all, global or local. They only come into the play when you try to share the same function for both, right on the top level. > For ioctl, we'd have a new file_operation: > > long ioctl(struct file *, unsigned int, unsigned long, enum syscall_arch); > > I'm not saying this is easy, but I think it's possible and the result > would be more obviously correct than what we have now. No, it would not. Seriously, from time to time a bit of RTFS before grand proposals turns out to be useful.
