[uml-devel] Re: [uml-user] keyring syscalls

[uml-devel] Re: [uml-user] keyring syscalls

[Blaisorblade]

On Thursday 18 November 2004 17:09, Michael Halcrow wrote:
> Howdy folks,
>
> I am attempting to use David Howells' new keyring in 2.6.10-rc2 UML
> and am getting a ``Function not implemented'' error with keyctl.  I
> was getting that in my host kernel until I mucked with the __NR_*
> #define's in the userspace keyctl.c to align with the values in the
> 2.6.10-rc2 entry.S.  I imagine that new syscalls require some magic in
> UML that I am unfamiliar with.  I tried adding some entries to
> arch/um/include/sysdep-i386/syscalls.h for keyctl et. al., to no
> avail, but I'm kind of shooting the dark here.
>
> Thanks,
> Mike
Ok, please list the new syscalls - I see at least add_key() and request_key() 
too - are these three the only ones? I'll build the patch ASAP when getting 
your answer.
-- 
Paolo Giarrusso, aka Blaisorblade
Linux registered user n. 292729



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: InterSystems CACHE
FREE OODBMS DOWNLOAD - A multidimensional database that combines
robust object and relational technologies, making it a perfect match
for Java, C++,COM, XML, ODBC and JDBC. www.intersystems.com/match8
_______________________________________________
User-mode-linux-devel mailing list
User-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel

[uml-devel] Re: [uml-user] keyring syscalls

[Michael Halcrow]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1314 bytes --]

On Thu, Nov 18, 2004 at 06:39:26PM +0100, Blaisorblade wrote:
> On Thursday 18 November 2004 17:09, Michael Halcrow wrote:
> > Howdy folks,
> >
> > I am attempting to use David Howells' new keyring in 2.6.10-rc2
> > UML and am getting a ``Function not implemented'' error with
> > keyctl.  I was getting that in my host kernel until I mucked with
> > the __NR_* #define's in the userspace keyctl.c to align with the
> > values in the 2.6.10-rc2 entry.S.  I imagine that new syscalls
> > require some magic in UML that I am unfamiliar with.  I tried
> > adding some entries to arch/um/include/sysdep-i386/syscalls.h for
> > keyctl et. al., to no avail, but I'm kind of shooting the dark
> > here.
>
> Ok, please list the new syscalls - I see at least add_key() and
> request_key() too - are these three the only ones? I'll build the
> patch ASAP when getting your answer.

Yes, those are the only three.  Thanks!

Mike
.___________________________________________________________________.
                         Michael A. Halcrow                          
       Security Software Engineer, IBM Linux Technology Center       
GnuPG Fingerprint: 05B5 08A8 713A 64C1 D35D  2371 2D3C FDDA 3EB6 601D

"Never go to a doctor whose office plants have died."                
 - Erma Bombeck 

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

[uml-devel] Re: [uml-user] keyring syscalls

[Michael Halcrow]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1756 bytes --]

On Thu, Nov 18, 2004 at 06:39:26PM +0100, Blaisorblade wrote:
> On Thursday 18 November 2004 17:09, Michael Halcrow wrote:
> Ok, please list the new syscalls - I see at least add_key() and
> request_key() too - are these three the only ones? I'll build the
> patch ASAP when getting your answer.

I spent some more time today trying to implement these silly
request_key, add_key, and keyctl syscalls in the 2.6.10 kernel, but I
haven't had any luck.  It would be a *tremendous* help for me in my
filesystem development if I could just get these syscalls working in
UML; it is much more tedious having to use kgdb in my debugging.  I
tried adding entries on to the end of the
include/sysdep-i386/syscalls.h and the kernel/sys_call_table.c files.
I also exported the symbols in os-Linux/user_syms.c.  I am trying to
work from the documentation here:

http://jdike.stearns.org/uml/arch-port.html

I am not entirely clear on the function that ``[ 222 ] =
sys_ni_syscall,'' at the end of the table in syscalls.h is supposed to
serve.  Syscalls in UML contstitutes new territory for me.

I would assume that the __NR_* assignments in the UML environment are
identical to those of the host system.  That means that request_key,
for example, maps to identifier 288 on the i386 architecture, right?
The keyctl.c utility defines these syscall identifiers, so I need to
make sure that I get the numbers right for the syscall table lookup.

Thanks,
Mike
.___________________________________________________________________.
                         Michael A. Halcrow                          
       Security Software Engineer, IBM Linux Technology Center       
GnuPG Fingerprint: 05B5 08A8 713A 64C1 D35D  2371 2D3C FDDA 3EB6 601D

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

Re: [uml-devel] Re: [uml-user] keyring syscalls

[Henrik Nordstrom]

On Tue, 25 Jan 2005, Michael Halcrow wrote:

> I am not entirely clear on the function that ``[ 222 ] =
> sys_ni_syscall,'' at the end of the table in syscalls.h is supposed to
> serve.

This says that syscall number 222 is not implemented, which it isn't on 
i386 (not defined).

>  Syscalls in UML contstitutes new territory for me.

Mostly the same as syscalls in any other architecture. A big table with 
function pointers to each syscall, indexed by the syscall number.

As each architecture has it's own syscall table but UML sharing the 
syscall numbers with the host architecture things get a little confusing 
sometimes. And in addition the UML syscall table often lags behind a 
little, missing the newer syscalls.

Note that the main syscall table is defined in 
arch/um/kernel/sys_call_table.c, the define in the 
include/asm/sysdep/syscalls.h is just the part of the syscall table which 
is specific to a certain host architecture.

To add a new generic syscall you should

   1. Add it to asm-xxx/unistd.h of each architecture, except for um which 
picks it up from the host architecture.
   2. Add it to the syscall table of earch architecture, um included.

To add a new i386 only syscall you should

   1. Add it to asm-i386/unistd.h
   2. Add it to the i386 syscall table
   3. Add it to um i386 specific syscall table in 
asm-um/sysdep-i386/syscall.h

> I would assume that the __NR_* assignments in the UML environment are 
> identical to those of the host system.

They are. UML directly includes unistd.h from the host architecture.

> That means that request_key,
> for example, maps to identifier 288 on the i386 architecture, right?

Which should have their appropriate _NR_xxx identifiers defined. For 
maintenance reasons the syscall table should be built using _NR_xxx 
identifiers, not the absolute numbers.

Regards
Henrik


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting
Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time
by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc.
Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl
_______________________________________________
User-mode-linux-devel mailing list
User-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel

[uml-devel] Re: [uml-user] keyring syscalls

[Blaisorblade]

On Tuesday 25 January 2005 22:54, Michael Halcrow wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2004 at 06:39:26PM +0100, Blaisorblade wrote:
> > On Thursday 18 November 2004 17:09, Michael Halcrow wrote:
> > Ok, please list the new syscalls - I see at least add_key() and
> > request_key() too - are these three the only ones? I'll build the
> > patch ASAP when getting your answer.
>
> I spent some more time today trying to implement these silly
> request_key, add_key, and keyctl syscalls in the 2.6.10 kernel, but I
> haven't had any luck.  It would be a *tremendous* help for me in my
> filesystem development if I could just get these syscalls working in
> UML; it is much more tedious having to use kgdb in my debugging.  I
> tried adding entries on to the end of the
> include/sysdep-i386/syscalls.h and the kernel/sys_call_table.c files.
> I also exported the symbols in os-Linux/user_syms.c.  I am trying to
> work from the documentation here:
>
> http://jdike.stearns.org/uml/arch-port.html
>
> I am not entirely clear on the function that ``[ 222 ] =
> sys_ni_syscall,'' at the end of the table in syscalls.h is supposed to
> serve.  Syscalls in UML contstitutes new territory for me.
Well, like 
> I would assume that the __NR_* assignments in the UML environment are
> identical to those of the host system.  That means that request_key,
> for example, maps to identifier 288 on the i386 architecture, right?
Yes, because when a program says "I want to call the write() syscall", all it 
contains to identify the "write" syscall between all the existing ones is the 
__NR_write value... so it is very important that they never change (on the 
same architecture). As long as UML must emulate i386, the identifiers must 
match.

> The keyctl.c utility defines these syscall identifiers, so I need to
> make sure that I get the numbers right for the syscall table lookup.

> Thanks,
> Mike
Well, it should be fixed in the -mm tree (and probably in 2.6.11-rc2-bk2, I 
guess, though it's not tested)... browse the patches at 
http://user-mode-linux.sourceforge.net/patches.html.

It should be in next release...
-- 
Paolo Giarrusso, aka Blaisorblade
Linux registered user n. 292729
http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting
Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time
by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc.
Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl
_______________________________________________
User-mode-linux-devel mailing list
User-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel

[uml-devel] Re: [uml-user] keyring syscalls

[Michael Halcrow]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1174 bytes --]

On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 11:37:57PM +0100, Blaisorblade wrote:
> On Tuesday 25 January 2005 22:54, Michael Halcrow wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 18, 2004 at 06:39:26PM +0100, Blaisorblade wrote:
> Well, it should be fixed in the -mm tree (and probably in 2.6.11-rc2-bk2, I 
> guess, though it's not tested)... browse the patches at 
> http://user-mode-linux.sourceforge.net/patches.html.

I did notice that and tried to build it, but I had build errors.
Specifically, the compiler complains that the PTRACE_SETOPTIONS symbol
is undeclared in arch/um/kernel/process.c.  If I include
linux/ptrace.h and try again, then the new syscalls (vperfctr_*) are
undeclared in arch/um/kernel/sys_call_table.c.  I just gave up at that
point; I'll wait for the official 2.6.11 release.  In the meantime,
I'll see if I can't backport the changes in the 2.6.11-rc2 patch to
2.6.10.

Thanks,
Mike
.___________________________________________________________________.
                         Michael A. Halcrow                          
       Security Software Engineer, IBM Linux Technology Center       
GnuPG Fingerprint: 05B5 08A8 713A 64C1 D35D  2371 2D3C FDDA 3EB6 601D

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

[uml-devel] Re: [uml-user] keyring syscalls

[Blaisorblade]

On Tuesday 25 January 2005 23:46, Michael Halcrow wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 11:37:57PM +0100, Blaisorblade wrote:
> > On Tuesday 25 January 2005 22:54, Michael Halcrow wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 18, 2004 at 06:39:26PM +0100, Blaisorblade wrote:
> >
> > Well, it should be fixed in the -mm tree (and probably in 2.6.11-rc2-bk2,
> > I guess, though it's not tested)... browse the patches at
> > http://user-mode-linux.sourceforge.net/patches.html.
>
> I did notice that and tried to build it, but I had build errors.
> Specifically, the compiler complains that the PTRACE_SETOPTIONS symbol
> is undeclared in arch/um/kernel/process.c.  If I include
> linux/ptrace.h and try again, then the new syscalls (vperfctr_*) are
> undeclared in arch/um/kernel/sys_call_table.c.
Yes, that was fixed some patches later... Jeff added those syscalls to match 
-mm (since he works on that)... I made him notice and I thought I even posted 
a patch.
> I just gave up at that 
> point; I'll wait for the official 2.6.11 release.
That *will* have to work.
> In the meantime, 
> I'll see if I can't backport the changes in the 2.6.11-rc2 patch to
> 2.6.10.
>
> Thanks,
> Mike
> .___________________________________________________________________.
>                          Michael A. Halcrow
>        Security Software Engineer, IBM Linux Technology Center
> GnuPG Fingerprint: 05B5 08A8 713A 64C1 D35D  2371 2D3C FDDA 3EB6 601D

-- 
Paolo Giarrusso, aka Blaisorblade
Linux registered user n. 292729
http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting
Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time
by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc.
Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl
_______________________________________________
User-mode-linux-devel mailing list
User-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel