All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: Arun Sharma <arun.sharma@intel.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>,
	linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: sys getdents64 needs compat wrapper ?
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 01:36:31 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200406180136.34384.arnd@arndb.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <40D21B17.4060603@intel.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5306 bytes --]

On Freitag, 18. Juni 2004 00:28, Arun Sharma wrote:
> It took us a bit longer :) But here's the promised patch. Using
> __put_user_unaligned() on ia64 may still cause unaligned faults,
> but we chose to optimize for the common case, where it's 4 byte
> aligned.   

Isn't it legal for i386 code to pass syscall arguments with
an arbitrary alignment? I guess gcc normally aligns everything
to 32 bit unless you force it not to but you might still return
error for syscalls that work fine on a native i386 system.

> + */
> +#define __get_user_unaligned(x, ptr)                                   \
> +({                                                                     \
> +       __typeof__ (*(ptr)) __x = (x);                                  \
> +       copy_from_user(&__x, (ptr), sizeof(*(ptr))) ? -EFAULT : 0;      \
> +})

This should be __copy_from_user instead of copy_from_user, right?

> +
> +
> +/* 
> + * This macro should be used instead of __put_user() when accessing
> + * values at locations that are unknown to be aligned.
> + */
> +#define __put_user_unaligned(x, ptr)                                   \
> +({                                                                     \
> +       __typeof__ (*(ptr)) __x = (x);                                  \
> +       copy_to_user((ptr), &__x, sizeof(*(ptr))) ? -EFAULT : 0;        \
> +})

same here.

> +extern long __put_user_unaligned_unknown (void);
> +
> +#define __put_user_unaligned(x, ptr)                                                           \
> +({                                                                                             \
> +       long __ret;                                                                             \
> +       switch (sizeof(*(ptr))) {                                                               \
> +               case 1: __ret = __put_user((x), (ptr)); break;                                  \
> +               case 2: __ret = (__put_user((x), (u8 __user *)(ptr)))                           \
> +                       || (__put_user((x) >> 8, ((u8 __user *)(ptr) + 1))); break;             \
> +               case 4: __ret = (__put_user((x), (u16 __user *)(ptr)))                          \
> +                       || (__put_user((x) >> 16, ((u16 __user *)(ptr) + 1))); break;           \
> +               case 8: __ret = (__put_user((x), (u32 __user *)(ptr)))                          \
> +                       || (__put_user((x) >> 32, ((u32 __user *)(ptr) + 1))); break;           \
> +               default: __ret = __put_user_unaligned_unknown();                                \
> +       }                                                                                       \
> +       __ret;                                                                                  \
> +})

Under what circumstances would you need to break down a 4 byte
alignment into 2 bytes? I can understand that you want to optimize
the unaligned-64 bit case because i386-gcc aligns them only to 32 bit
in user space, but the other special cases are bogus. Why not
just do:

#define __put_user_unaligned(x, ptr)					\
(									\
	(sizeof(*(ptr)) == 8) ?						\
		((__put_user((x), (u32 __user *)(ptr)))			\
		 | (__put_user((x) >> 32, ((u32 __user *)(ptr) + 1))))	\
		: __put_user(x,ptr)					\
)

Note also the use of | instead of || to get the correct value on error
(-EFAULT, not 1).

> diff -purN -X dontdiff linux-2.6.7-rc3-getdents/include/asm-ppc64/uaccess.h linux-2.6.7-rc3-getdents-user_unaligned/include/asm-ppc64/uaccess.h
> --- linux-2.6.7-rc3-getdents/include/asm-ppc64/uaccess.h        2004-06-15 13:41:35.000000000 +0800
> +++ linux-2.6.7-rc3-getdents-user_unaligned/include/asm-ppc64/uaccess.h 2004-06-17 14:51:42.020600447 +0800
> @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@
>  #include <linux/sched.h>
>  #include <linux/errno.h>
>  #include <asm/processor.h>
> +#include <asm-generic/uaccess.h>
>  
>  #define VERIFY_READ    0
>  #define VERIFY_WRITE   1
> diff -purN -X dontdiff linux-2.6.7-rc3-getdents/include/asm-s390/uaccess.h linux-2.6.7-rc3-getdents-user_unaligned/include/asm-s390/uaccess.h
> --- linux-2.6.7-rc3-getdents/include/asm-s390/uaccess.h 2004-06-15 13:41:39.000000000 +0800
> +++ linux-2.6.7-rc3-getdents-user_unaligned/include/asm-s390/uaccess.h  2004-06-17 14:51:42.021577010 +0800
> @@ -16,6 +16,7 @@
>   */
>  #include <linux/sched.h>
>  #include <linux/errno.h>
> +#include <asm-generic/uaccess.h>
>  
>  #define VERIFY_READ     0
>  #define VERIFY_WRITE    1

ppc64 and s390 both don't care about alignment, so simply using

#define __get_user_unaligned __get_user
#define __put_user_unaligned __put_user

would make more sense here. See include/asm-*/unaligned.h

> diff -purN -X dontdiff linux-2.6.7-rc3-getdents/include/asm-x86_64/uaccess.h linux-2.6.7-rc3-getdents-user_unaligned/include/asm-x86_64/uaccess.h
> --- linux-2.6.7-rc3-getdents/include/asm-x86_64/uaccess.h       2004-06-15 13:41:34.000000000 +0800
> +++ linux-2.6.7-rc3-getdents-user_unaligned/include/asm-x86_64/uaccess.h        2004-06-17 14:51:42.022553572 +0800
> @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
>  #include <linux/sched.h>
>  #include <linux/prefetch.h>
>  #include <asm/page.h>
> +#include <asm-generic/uaccess.h>
>  
>  #define VERIFY_READ 0
>  #define VERIFY_WRITE 1

Same on x86_64.

	Arnd <><

[-- Attachment #2: signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2004-06-17 23:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-05-20 21:06 =?iso-8859-1?Q?Re:_sys_getdents64_needs_compat_wrapper_??= Arnd Bergmann
2004-06-05  0:16 ` =?iso-8859-1?Q?Re:_sys_getdents64_needs_compat_wrapper_??= Arun Sharma
2004-06-05  0:28   ` sys getdents64 needs compat wrapper ? David S. Miller
2004-06-07 21:13     ` Arun Sharma
2004-06-07 21:58       ` David S. Miller
2004-06-11 15:09       ` Arnd Bergmann
2004-06-14 18:15         ` Arun Sharma
2004-06-17 22:28           ` Arun Sharma
2004-06-17 23:36             ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2004-06-18  0:56               ` Arun Sharma
2004-06-18 17:05                 ` Arun Sharma
2004-06-20 21:50                   ` Arnd Bergmann
2004-06-22 18:21                     ` Arun Sharma
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-06-05 14:52 =?iso-8859-1?Q?Re:_Re:_Re:_sys_getdents64_needs_compat_wrapper_??= Arnd Bergmann
2004-06-05 18:41 ` sys getdents64 needs compat wrapper ? Andrew Morton
2004-06-05 19:31   ` David S. Miller
2004-05-20 18:32 sys_getdents64 " Arun Sharma
2004-05-20 20:58 ` David S. Miller

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=200406180136.34384.arnd@arndb.de \
    --to=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=arun.sharma@intel.com \
    --cc=davem@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.