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 23:19:34 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <57147C76.3060005@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrXfWWNTNy-hKxT6K+XQqDRdu=45jF+ZcMKvB0ANm4jYGQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 04/17/16 23:14, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>
>> 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.
> 
> What ABI?
> 

The C ABI for int.  I hadn't seen the below, because I think syscall(3)
is just braindamaged, but the odds are that if we'd ever use the upper
32 bits for anything we'd be in a world of hurt, so that would be highly
theoretical IMO.  Bit 31 might be possible, but I wouldn't really want
to brave it unless we really have no choice.

> Also, the behavior in which fail the syscall if any high bits are set
> is faster -- it's one fewer instruction.  Admittedly, the CPU can
> probably do that instruction for free, but still...

Yes, it can; at least on any remotely modern hardware.

	-hpa

  reply	other threads:[~2016-04-18  6:19 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
2016-04-18  6:14                     ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-04-18  6:19                       ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
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=57147C76.3060005@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