Re: [PATCH v1 02/14] futex: Extend the FUTEX2 flags

[Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>]

On Mon, Jul 31 2023 at 19:35, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 07:16:29PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 31 2023 at 18:11, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> > On Fri, Jul 21 2023 at 12:22, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> >> -#define FUTEX2_MASK (FUTEX2_32 | FUTEX2_PRIVATE)
>> >> +#define FUTEX2_MASK (FUTEX2_64 | FUTEX2_PRIVATE)
>> >>  
>> >>  /**
>> >>   * futex_parse_waitv - Parse a waitv array from userspace
>> >> @@ -207,7 +207,12 @@ static int futex_parse_waitv(struct fute
>> >>  		if ((aux.flags & ~FUTEX2_MASK) || aux.__reserved)
>> >>  			return -EINVAL;
>> >
>> > With the above aux.flags with FUTEX2_32 set will result in -EINVAL. I
>> > don't think that's intentional.
>> 
>> Also if you allow 64bit wide futexes, how is that supposed to work with
>> the existing code, which clearly expects a 32bit uval throughout the
>> place?
>
> Not allowed yet, these patches only allow 8,16,32. I still need to audit
> the whole futex core and do 'u32 -> unsigned long' (and everything else
> that follows from that), and only when that's done can the futex2
> syscalls allow FUTEX2_64 on 64bit archs.
>
> So for now, these patches:
>
>   - add the FUTEX2_64 flag,
>   - add 'unsigned long' interface such that
>     64bit can potentiall use it,
>   - explicitly disallow having it set.

I figured that out very late. This flags having a size fields which
claims to be flags had confused the hell out of me.