From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
"Brian Gerst" <brgerst@gmail.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, "X86 ML" <x86@kernel.org>,
"Borislav Petkov" <bp@alien8.de>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>, "Jan Kara" <jack@suse.cz>,
"Paweł Jasiak" <pawel@jasiak.xyz>,
"Russell King" <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fanotify: Fix sys_fanotify_mark() on native x86-32
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 19:00:52 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201201190051.GB2502@gaia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrWbEvD4SO4GosJyeCmaT2BFwX8Xy+EF_D0x91np3k9OaA@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Dec 01, 2020 at 09:34:32AM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 9:23 AM Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 2:31 PM Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Commit 121b32a58a3a converted native x86-32 which take 64-bit arguments to
> > > use the compat handlers to allow conversion to passing args via pt_regs.
> > > sys_fanotify_mark() was however missed, as it has a general compat handler.
> > > Add a config option that will use the syscall wrapper that takes the split
> > > args for native 32-bit.
> > >
> > > Reported-by: Paweł Jasiak <pawel@jasiak.xyz>
> > > Fixes: 121b32a58a3a ("x86/entry/32: Use IA32-specific wrappers for syscalls taking 64-bit arguments")
> > > Signed-off-by: Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>
> > > ---
> > > arch/Kconfig | 6 ++++++
> > > arch/x86/Kconfig | 1 +
> > > fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify_user.c | 17 +++++++----------
> > > include/linux/syscalls.h | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > 4 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/Kconfig b/arch/Kconfig
> > > index 090ef3566c56..452cc127c285 100644
> > > --- a/arch/Kconfig
> > > +++ b/arch/Kconfig
> > > @@ -1045,6 +1045,12 @@ config HAVE_STATIC_CALL_INLINE
> > > bool
> > > depends on HAVE_STATIC_CALL
> > >
> > > +config ARCH_SPLIT_ARG64
> > > + bool
> > > + help
> > > + If a 32-bit architecture requires 64-bit arguments to be split into
> > > + pairs of 32-bit arguemtns, select this option.
> >
> > You misspelled arguments. You might also want to clarify that, for
> > 64-bit arches, this means that compat syscalls split their arguments.
>
> No, that's backwards. Maybe it should be depends !64BIT instead.
>
> But I'm really quite confused about something: what's special about
> x86 here? Are there really Linux arches (compat or 32-bit native)
> that *don't* split arguments like this? Sure, some arches probably
> work the same way that x86 used to in which the compiler did the
> splitting by magic for us, but that was always a bit of a kludge.
On arm32 we rely on the compiler splitting a 64-bit argument in two
consecutive registers. But I wouldn't say it's a kludge (well, mostly)
as that's part of the arm procedure calling standard. Currently arm32
doesn't pass the syscall arguments through a read from pt_regs, so all
is handled transparently.
On arm64 compat, we need to re-assemble the arguments with some
wrappers explicitly (arch/arm64/kernel/sys32.c) or call the generic
wrapper like in the compat_sys_fanotify_mark() case.
> Could this change maybe be made unconditional?
I think it's fine in this particular case.
I don't think it's valid in general because of the arm (and maybe
others) requirement that the first register of a 64-bit argument is an
even number (IIRC, Russell should know better). If the u64 mask was an
argument before or after the current position, the compiler would have
introduced a pad register but not if the arg is split in two u32.
--
Catalin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-12-01 19:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20201130223059.101286-1-brgerst@gmail.com>
[not found] ` <CALCETrWZ5eH=0Rjd-vBFRtk-tFQ3tN8_rReaKdVbSm78PFQ7_g@mail.gmail.com>
2020-12-01 17:34 ` [PATCH] fanotify: Fix sys_fanotify_mark() on native x86-32 Andy Lutomirski
2020-12-01 19:00 ` Catalin Marinas [this message]
2020-12-01 19:10 ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-12-01 19:19 ` Brian Gerst
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=20201201190051.GB2502@gaia \
--to=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=brgerst@gmail.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=pawel@jasiak.xyz \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).