public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/entry/x32: Check top 32 bits of syscall number on the fast path
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2016 23:01:27 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <57147837.2030706@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrUSu5cnUfqwK1FK61UnQ6uo=QccPejtohuQRhhz7aP1iw@mail.gmail.com>

On 04/17/16 22:48, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> 
> I think I prefer the "reject weird input" behavior over the "accept
> and normalize weird input" if we can get away with it, and I'm fairly
> confident that we can get away with "reject weird input" given that
> distro kernels do exactly that already.
> 

It's not "weird", it is the ABI as defined.  We have to do this for all
the system call arguments, too; you just don't notice it because the
compiler does it for us.  Some other architectures, e.g. s390, has the
opposite convention where the caller is responsible for normalizing the
result; in that case we have to do it *again* in the kernel, which is
one of the major reasons for the SYSCALL_*() macros.

So I'm not sure this is a valid consideration.  The reason it generally
works is because the natural way for the user space code to work is to
load a value into %eax which will naturally zero-extend to %rax, but it
isn't inherently required to work that way.

	-hpa

  reply	other threads:[~2016-04-18  6:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-04-14 17:22 System call number masking Ben Hutchings
2016-04-14 17:48 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-04-18  0:45   ` Ben Hutchings
2016-04-18  0:47     ` [PATCH] x86/entry/x32: Check top 32 bits of syscall number on the fast path Ben Hutchings
2016-04-18  4:50       ` H. Peter Anvin
2016-04-18  5:18         ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-04-18  5:21           ` H. Peter Anvin
2016-04-18  5:39             ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-04-18  5:45               ` H. Peter Anvin
2016-04-18  5:48                 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-04-18  6:01                   ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2016-04-18  6:14                     ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-04-18  6:19                       ` H. Peter Anvin
2016-04-18  5:24           ` H. Peter Anvin

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=57147837.2030706@zytor.com \
    --to=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=ben@decadent.org.uk \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luto@amacapital.net \
    --cc=luto@kernel.org \
    --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