Re: [patch 16/18] x86/entry: Get rid of the sys_ni_syscall() indirection

[Thomas Gleixner <tglx@kernel.org>]

On Thu, Oct 22 2026 at 21:15, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 22 2026 at 16:24, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
>> On 2026-07-07 21:07:01 [+0200], Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> |[RUN]           Checking out of range system calls
>> |[FAIL]                  x32 syscall 1:-64 returned -9999, but it should have returned -ENOSYS
>> |[FAIL]              x32 syscalls 1:-64..-2 had 63 failure
>> |[OK]                x32 syscall 1:-1 returned MODIFIED_BY_PTRACE as expected
>> |[FAIL]                  x64 syscall 1:1073741760 returned -9999, but it should have returned -ENOSYS
>> …
>>
>> and so on… The test has
>>
>> | #define MODIFIED_BY_PTRACE      -9999
>>
>> and the ptracer modifies the return code. However not always. Not sure
>> if this was indeed a pointless exercise or not.
>
> Hrmm. That's weird. Let me have a look.

So I clearly failed to decode the overloading of the -1L return value
correctly and then failed to run the stupid test.

TBH, this whole thing was a horrid and inconsistent mess.

The logic in the original code was:

    When the entry work code returned an invalid syscall number then the
    return value in regs->ax was set to -ENOSYS, except when the
    returned syscall number was -1. Syscall number "-1" indicated that
    the syscall has to be aborted.

     regs->ax = -ENOSYS;
     syscall = enter_work(regs, syscall);
     if (syscall_in_range(syscall))
        regs->ax = do_syscall(syscall);
     else if (syscall != -1)
        regs->ax = -ENOSYS;

So if the ptrace check in enter_work() overwrote regs->ax and the
syscall number (either as supplied by user space or rewritten) was out
of range and not -1 then the x86 entry code overwrote regs->ax to
-ENOSYS again. IOW, there is no distinction between a check induced
abort and a syscall with syscall number -1.

The rework changed the return value to boolean, which is true when the
syscall should be invoked and false when one of the checks requests to
abort the syscall. In that case the return code does not touch the
return value in regs->ax.

If the eventually modified syscall number is out of range then the code
relies on the fact that regs->ax was preset with -ENOSYS, i.e.:

     regs->ax = -ENOSYS;
     // True indicates to proceed
     if (enter_work(regs, &syscall)) {
         if (syscall_in_range(syscall))
            regs->ax = do_syscall(syscall);
     }

That seems to be equivalent, but it is not when ptrace() modifies
the return value in regs->ax and also rewrites the syscall number to an
invalid value or leaves the user supplied invalid value intact and does
_NOT_ abort the syscall.

So the reworked code does not overwrite the tracer modified return value
with -ENOSYS in that case and returns whatever the tracer decided to put
into it.

TBH, that makes a lot more sense than the original behavior. If the
tracer decides to fiddle with the default return value then that's what
the tracer intended.

That makes the behavior consistent vs. other abort scenarios:

    ptrace()
      regs->ax = MAGIC;
      return true;            // Allow syscall

    seccomp()
      return false;          // Abort syscall

So when the tracer modified the return value and seccomp aborts the
syscall then the tracer induced value is preserved. That was the case in
the original code as well because seccomp() indicated the abort by
returning -1 as the modified syscall number. Similar effects when ftrace
(BPF, kprobe) decided to overwrite the syscall number).

Bringing the original behaviour back is trivial enough, but I'm not
convinced that it makes any sense and is worth it. At least this
confines the x32 specific insanity of treating -1 special to x32...

Thanks,

        tglx
---
--- a/arch/x86/entry/syscall_32.c
+++ b/arch/x86/entry/syscall_32.c
@@ -77,6 +77,8 @@ static __always_inline void do_syscall_3
 	if (likely(nr < IA32_NR_syscalls)) {
 		nr = array_index_nospec(nr, IA32_NR_syscalls);
 		regs->ax = ia32_sys_call(regs, (unsigned int)nr);
+	} else {
+		regs->ax = -ENOSYS;
 	}
 }
 
--- a/arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c
+++ b/arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c
@@ -64,15 +64,24 @@ static __always_inline bool do_syscall_x
 	return false;
 }
 
-static __always_inline void do_syscall_x32(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long nr)
+static __always_inline bool do_syscall_x32(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long nr)
 {
+	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_X32_ABI))
+		return false;
+
+	/* Preserve the historic insanity of treating -1 special on x32 */
+	if (nr == ULONG_MAX)
+		return true;
+
 	/* Adjust the starting offset of the table */
 	nr -= __X32_SYSCALL_BIT;
 
-	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_X32_ABI) && likely(nr < X32_NR_syscalls)) {
+	if (likely(nr < X32_NR_syscalls)) {
 		nr = array_index_nospec(nr, X32_NR_syscalls);
 		regs->ax = x32_sys_call(regs, (unsigned int)nr);
+		return true;
 	}
+	return false;
 }
 
 /* Returns true to return using SYSRET, or false to use IRET */
@@ -81,8 +90,10 @@ static __always_inline void do_syscall_x
 	if (likely(syscall_enter_from_user_mode_randomize_stack(regs, &nr))) {
 		instrumentation_begin();
 
-		if (!do_syscall_x64(regs, nr))
-			do_syscall_x32(regs, nr);
+		if (unlikely(!do_syscall_x64(regs, nr))) {
+			if (!do_syscall_x32(regs, nr))
+				regs->ax = -ENOSYS;
+		}
 
 		instrumentation_end();
 	}