From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Zhangjian (Bamvor)" Subject: Re: [PATCH 20/25] arm64:ilp32: add sys_ilp32.c and a separate table (in entry.S) to use it Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 20:52:46 +0800 Message-ID: <57347C9E.7010708@huawei.com> References: <1459894127-17698-1-git-send-email-ynorov@caviumnetworks.com> <573305A8.50406@huawei.com> <5733149C.4030903@huawei.com> <5250356.myv9GIZ34h@wuerfel> <5733FC71.8070101@huawei.com> <20160512082427.GA1587@yury-N73SV> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20160512082427.GA1587@yury-N73SV> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Yury Norov Cc: Arnd Bergmann , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Pinski , catalin.marinas@arm.com, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com, Hanjun Guo , joseph@codesourcery.com, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, "jijun (D)" , Prasun.Kapoor@caviumnetworks.com, schwab@suse.de, agraf@suse.de, pinskia@gmail.com, klimov.linux@gmail.com, broonie@kernel.org, Nathan_Lynch@mentor.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Pinski , schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, christoph.muellner@theobroma-systems.com, "Zhangjian (Bamvor)" List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org Hi, On 2016/5/12 16:24, Yury Norov wrote: > On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 11:45:53AM +0800, Zhangjian (Bamvor) wrote: > > [...] > >>> Hmm, that is indeed tricky. I think COMPAT_SYSCALL_WRAP4 rightfully >>> refuses the loff_t argument here, as the common case is that this is >>> not possible. >> It works if I apply the following patch, I defined the wrong `__TYPE_IS_xxx` >> yesterday. Should we merge this into ILP32 series or send the compat.h >> and syscalls.h individually? The current series of ILP32 is a little bit >> long and hard to review. >> diff --git a/include/linux/compat.h b/include/linux/compat.h >> index ba6ebe0..22a9565 100644 >> --- a/include/linux/compat.h >> +++ b/include/linux/compat.h >> @@ -747,7 +747,8 @@ asmlinkage long compat_sys_fanotify_mark(int, unsigned int, __u32, __u32, >> #ifndef __SC_COMPAT_CAST >> #define __SC_COMPAT_CAST(t, a) ({ \ >> BUILD_BUG_ON((sizeof(t) > 4) && !__TYPE_IS_L(t) && \ >> - !__TYPE_IS_UL(t) && !__TYPE_IS_PTR(t)); \ >> + !__TYPE_IS_UL(t) && !__TYPE_IS_PTR(t) && \ >> + !__TYPE_IS_LOFFT(t)); \ > > I think it's wrong, as loff_t is 64-bit in 32-bit userspace, and this > will clear meaningful data in top halve. Yes. It is my fault. The original thoughts is clear the up 32bit for size_t. How should we skip the loff_t? Regards Bamvor From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from szxga04-in.huawei.com ([58.251.152.52]:57150 "EHLO szxga04-in.huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753127AbcELMx7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 May 2016 08:53:59 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 20/25] arm64:ilp32: add sys_ilp32.c and a separate table (in entry.S) to use it References: <1459894127-17698-1-git-send-email-ynorov@caviumnetworks.com> <573305A8.50406@huawei.com> <5733149C.4030903@huawei.com> <5250356.myv9GIZ34h@wuerfel> <5733FC71.8070101@huawei.com> <20160512082427.GA1587@yury-N73SV> From: "Zhangjian (Bamvor)" Message-ID: <57347C9E.7010708@huawei.com> Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 20:52:46 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160512082427.GA1587@yury-N73SV> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Yury Norov Cc: Arnd Bergmann , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Pinski , catalin.marinas@arm.com, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com, Hanjun Guo , joseph@codesourcery.com, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, "jijun (D)" , Prasun.Kapoor@caviumnetworks.com, schwab@suse.de, agraf@suse.de, pinskia@gmail.com, klimov.linux@gmail.com, broonie@kernel.org, Nathan_Lynch@mentor.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Pinski , schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, christoph.muellner@theobroma-systems.com, "Zhangjian (Bamvor)" Message-ID: <20160512125246.B2nZn02Ach6J2kFRGuajFwmkTyOCKxyBJkZmTpUl5S0@z> Hi, On 2016/5/12 16:24, Yury Norov wrote: > On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 11:45:53AM +0800, Zhangjian (Bamvor) wrote: > > [...] > >>> Hmm, that is indeed tricky. I think COMPAT_SYSCALL_WRAP4 rightfully >>> refuses the loff_t argument here, as the common case is that this is >>> not possible. >> It works if I apply the following patch, I defined the wrong `__TYPE_IS_xxx` >> yesterday. Should we merge this into ILP32 series or send the compat.h >> and syscalls.h individually? The current series of ILP32 is a little bit >> long and hard to review. >> diff --git a/include/linux/compat.h b/include/linux/compat.h >> index ba6ebe0..22a9565 100644 >> --- a/include/linux/compat.h >> +++ b/include/linux/compat.h >> @@ -747,7 +747,8 @@ asmlinkage long compat_sys_fanotify_mark(int, unsigned int, __u32, __u32, >> #ifndef __SC_COMPAT_CAST >> #define __SC_COMPAT_CAST(t, a) ({ \ >> BUILD_BUG_ON((sizeof(t) > 4) && !__TYPE_IS_L(t) && \ >> - !__TYPE_IS_UL(t) && !__TYPE_IS_PTR(t)); \ >> + !__TYPE_IS_UL(t) && !__TYPE_IS_PTR(t) && \ >> + !__TYPE_IS_LOFFT(t)); \ > > I think it's wrong, as loff_t is 64-bit in 32-bit userspace, and this > will clear meaningful data in top halve. Yes. It is my fault. The original thoughts is clear the up 32bit for size_t. How should we skip the loff_t? Regards Bamvor