[PATCH] libattr 2.4.32 arm eabi system call calling convention

[PATCH] libattr 2.4.32 arm eabi system call calling convention

[Lennert Buytenhek]

When building for EABI, a different system call calling convention is
used where system calls are numbered starting from zero, not 0x900000
as in the old ABI.  This was causing 'ls -al' with an ls binary that
was built with xattr support to SIGILL.


--- attr-2.4.32/libattr/syscalls.c.orig	2006-11-30 03:34:25.000000000 +0100
+++ attr-2.4.32/libattr/syscalls.c	2006-11-30 03:35:12.000000000 +0100
@@ -110,7 +110,11 @@
 # define __NR_fremovexattr	235
 #elif defined (__arm__)
 # define HAVE_XATTR_SYSCALLS 1
-# define __NR_SYSCALL_BASE 0x900000
+# if defined(__ARM_EABI__) || defined(__thumb__)
+#  define __NR_SYSCALL_BASE 0
+# else
+#  define __NR_SYSCALL_BASE 0x900000
+# endif
 # define __NR_setxattr		(__NR_SYSCALL_BASE+226)
 # define __NR_lsetxattr		(__NR_SYSCALL_BASE+227)
 # define __NR_fsetxattr		(__NR_SYSCALL_BASE+228)

-------------------------------------------------------------------
List admin: http://lists.arm.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm
FAQ:        http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/mailinglists/faq.php
Etiquette:  http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/mailinglists/etiquette.php

Re: [PATCH] libattr 2.4.32 arm eabi system call calling convention

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Thu, Nov 30, 2006 at 03:54:59AM +0100, Lennert Buytenhek wrote:
> When building for EABI, a different system call calling convention is
> used where system calls are numbered starting from zero, not 0x900000
> as in the old ABI.  This was causing 'ls -al' with an ls binary that
> was built with xattr support to SIGILL.

Please just rip out the direct syscalls.  The days glibc provices all
the xattr syscalls in sys/xattr.h, and libattr should just forward to
those.

Re: [PATCH] libattr 2.4.32 arm eabi system call calling convention

[Lennert Buytenhek]

On Thu, Nov 30, 2006 at 09:28:53AM +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

> > When building for EABI, a different system call calling convention is
> > used where system calls are numbered starting from zero, not 0x900000
> > as in the old ABI.  This was causing 'ls -al' with an ls binary that
> > was built with xattr support to SIGILL.
> 
> Please just rip out the direct syscalls.  The days glibc provices all
> the xattr syscalls in sys/xattr.h, and libattr should just forward to
> those.

Sounds like the better option to me as well.  (Would have saved me
a bunch of work, too.)

Re: [PATCH] libattr 2.4.32 arm eabi system call calling convention

[Andreas Gruenbacher]

Hello,

On Thursday 30 November 2006 01:28, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2006 at 03:54:59AM +0100, Lennert Buytenhek wrote:
> > When building for EABI, a different system call calling convention is
> > used where system calls are numbered starting from zero, not 0x900000
> > as in the old ABI.  This was causing 'ls -al' with an ls binary that
> > was built with xattr support to SIGILL.
>
> Please just rip out the direct syscalls.  The days glibc provices all
> the xattr syscalls in sys/xattr.h, and libattr should just forward to
> those.

Yes, makes sense these days. Thanks for paying attention, Christoph.

Tim, who from the SGI side is taking care of the acl and attr packages in the 
xfs-cmds repository these days? Would you be doing this change, or are you 
waiting for a patch?

Thanks,
Andreas

PS. I hope we'll meet at linux.conf.au this January in Sydney, or in Melbourne 
some days later :-)

Re: [PATCH] libattr 2.4.32 arm eabi system call calling convention

[Nathan Scott]

On Thu, 2006-12-07 at 18:07 -0800, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> Hello,

Hi Andreas,

> On Thursday 30 November 2006 01:28, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 30, 2006 at 03:54:59AM +0100, Lennert Buytenhek wrote:
> > > When building for EABI, a different system call calling convention is
> > > used where system calls are numbered starting from zero, not 0x900000
> > > as in the old ABI.  This was causing 'ls -al' with an ls binary that
> > > was built with xattr support to SIGILL.
> >
> > Please just rip out the direct syscalls.  The days glibc provices all
> > the xattr syscalls in sys/xattr.h, and libattr should just forward to
> > those.
> 
> Yes, makes sense these days. Thanks for paying attention, Christoph.
> 
> Tim, who from the SGI side is taking care of the acl and attr packages in the 
> xfs-cmds repository these days? Would you be doing this change, or are you 
> waiting for a patch?

Tim's on holiday atm.  I'll cook up a patch (I have another attr patch
from someone I need to get merged too), and get someone to check it in.

> PS. I hope we'll meet at linux.conf.au this January in Sydney, or in Melbourne 
> some days later :-)

I'll see you there too (I'm looking forward to your LCA talk ;)

cheers.

-- 
Nathan