* [PATCH 1/3] arm64: compat: Avoid sending SIGILL for unallocated syscall numbers [not found] <1546539240-20647-1-git-send-email-will.deacon@arm.com> @ 2019-01-03 18:13 ` Will Deacon 2019-01-04 12:54 ` Dave Martin 2019-01-03 18:13 ` [PATCH 2/3] arm64: compat: Don't pull syscall number from regs in arm_compat_syscall Will Deacon 1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Will Deacon @ 2019-01-03 18:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel; +Cc: Dave.Martin, pihsun, Will Deacon, stable The ARM Linux kernel handles the EABI syscall numbers as follows: 0 - NR_SYSCALLS-1 : Invoke syscall via syscall table NR_SYSCALLS - 0xeffff : -ENOSYS (to be allocated in future) 0xf0000 - 0xf07ff : Private syscall or -ENOSYS if not allocated > 0xf07ff : SIGILL Our compat code gets this wrong and ends up sending SIGILL in response to all syscalls greater than NR_SYSCALLS which have a value greater than 0x7ff in the bottom 16 bits. Fix this by defining the end of the ARM private syscall region and checking the syscall number against that directly. Update the comment while we're at it. Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> Cc: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com> Reported-by: Pi-Hsun Shih <pihsun@chromium.org> Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> --- arch/arm64/include/asm/unistd.h | 5 +++-- arch/arm64/kernel/sys_compat.c | 4 ++-- 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/unistd.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/unistd.h index b13ca091f833..be66a54ee3a1 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/unistd.h +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/unistd.h @@ -40,8 +40,9 @@ * The following SVCs are ARM private. */ #define __ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE 0x0f0000 -#define __ARM_NR_compat_cacheflush (__ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE+2) -#define __ARM_NR_compat_set_tls (__ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE+5) +#define __ARM_NR_compat_cacheflush (__ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE + 2) +#define __ARM_NR_compat_set_tls (__ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE + 5) +#define __ARM_NR_compat_syscall_end (__ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE + 0x800) #define __NR_compat_syscalls 399 #endif diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/sys_compat.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/sys_compat.c index 32653d156747..5972b7533fa0 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/sys_compat.c +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/sys_compat.c @@ -102,12 +102,12 @@ long compat_arm_syscall(struct pt_regs *regs) default: /* - * Calls 9f00xx..9f07ff are defined to return -ENOSYS + * Calls 0xf0xxx..0xf07ff are defined to return -ENOSYS * if not implemented, rather than raising SIGILL. This * way the calling program can gracefully determine whether * a feature is supported. */ - if ((no & 0xffff) <= 0x7ff) + if (no < __ARM_NR_compat_syscall_end) return -ENOSYS; break; } -- 2.1.4 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/3] arm64: compat: Avoid sending SIGILL for unallocated syscall numbers 2019-01-03 18:13 ` [PATCH 1/3] arm64: compat: Avoid sending SIGILL for unallocated syscall numbers Will Deacon @ 2019-01-04 12:54 ` Dave Martin 2019-01-04 13:47 ` Will Deacon 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Dave Martin @ 2019-01-04 12:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Will Deacon; +Cc: linux-arm-kernel, stable, pihsun On Thu, Jan 03, 2019 at 06:13:58PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > The ARM Linux kernel handles the EABI syscall numbers as follows: > > 0 - NR_SYSCALLS-1 : Invoke syscall via syscall table > NR_SYSCALLS - 0xeffff : -ENOSYS (to be allocated in future) > 0xf0000 - 0xf07ff : Private syscall or -ENOSYS if not allocated > > 0xf07ff : SIGILL > > Our compat code gets this wrong and ends up sending SIGILL in response > to all syscalls greater than NR_SYSCALLS which have a value greater > than 0x7ff in the bottom 16 bits. > > Fix this by defining the end of the ARM private syscall region and > checking the syscall number against that directly. Update the comment > while we're at it. > > Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> > Cc: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com> > Reported-by: Pi-Hsun Shih <pihsun@chromium.org> > Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> > --- > arch/arm64/include/asm/unistd.h | 5 +++-- > arch/arm64/kernel/sys_compat.c | 4 ++-- > 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/unistd.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/unistd.h > index b13ca091f833..be66a54ee3a1 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/unistd.h > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/unistd.h > @@ -40,8 +40,9 @@ > * The following SVCs are ARM private. > */ > #define __ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE 0x0f0000 > -#define __ARM_NR_compat_cacheflush (__ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE+2) > -#define __ARM_NR_compat_set_tls (__ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE+5) > +#define __ARM_NR_compat_cacheflush (__ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE + 2) > +#define __ARM_NR_compat_set_tls (__ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE + 5) > +#define __ARM_NR_compat_syscall_end (__ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE + 0x800) Nit: there is no compat_syscall_end(). Can we make this #define upper case, like __ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE, since a symbolic bound, not a syscall number? It would be nice to have this for arch/arm too rather than the current magic numbers. > #define __NR_compat_syscalls 399 > #endif > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/sys_compat.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/sys_compat.c > index 32653d156747..5972b7533fa0 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/sys_compat.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/sys_compat.c > @@ -102,12 +102,12 @@ long compat_arm_syscall(struct pt_regs *regs) > > default: > /* > - * Calls 9f00xx..9f07ff are defined to return -ENOSYS > + * Calls 0xf0xxx..0xf07ff are defined to return -ENOSYS > * if not implemented, rather than raising SIGILL. This > * way the calling program can gracefully determine whether > * a feature is supported. > */ > - if ((no & 0xffff) <= 0x7ff) > + if (no < __ARM_NR_compat_syscall_end) arm_syscall() in arch/arm is not responsible for handling syscalls less __ARM_NR_BASE; the code in entry-common.S redirects those directly to sys_ni_syscall() instead. Given how fiddly this is I think it's preferable if we keep to the arch/arm code structure as much as possible, and call this function only when no >= __ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE? Regular (possibly unallocated) Linux syscalls can be more naturally handled in do_ni_syscall() instead IMHO, mirroring the entry-common.S code that it replaces. Cheers ---Dave ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/3] arm64: compat: Avoid sending SIGILL for unallocated syscall numbers 2019-01-04 12:54 ` Dave Martin @ 2019-01-04 13:47 ` Will Deacon 2019-01-04 14:15 ` Dave Martin 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Will Deacon @ 2019-01-04 13:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dave Martin; +Cc: linux-arm-kernel, stable, pihsun On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 12:54:26PM +0000, Dave Martin wrote: > On Thu, Jan 03, 2019 at 06:13:58PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > > The ARM Linux kernel handles the EABI syscall numbers as follows: > > > > 0 - NR_SYSCALLS-1 : Invoke syscall via syscall table > > NR_SYSCALLS - 0xeffff : -ENOSYS (to be allocated in future) > > 0xf0000 - 0xf07ff : Private syscall or -ENOSYS if not allocated > > > 0xf07ff : SIGILL > > > > Our compat code gets this wrong and ends up sending SIGILL in response > > to all syscalls greater than NR_SYSCALLS which have a value greater > > than 0x7ff in the bottom 16 bits. > > > > Fix this by defining the end of the ARM private syscall region and > > checking the syscall number against that directly. Update the comment > > while we're at it. > > > > Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> > > Cc: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com> > > Reported-by: Pi-Hsun Shih <pihsun@chromium.org> > > Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> > > --- > > arch/arm64/include/asm/unistd.h | 5 +++-- > > arch/arm64/kernel/sys_compat.c | 4 ++-- > > 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/unistd.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/unistd.h > > index b13ca091f833..be66a54ee3a1 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/unistd.h > > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/unistd.h > > @@ -40,8 +40,9 @@ > > * The following SVCs are ARM private. > > */ > > #define __ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE 0x0f0000 > > -#define __ARM_NR_compat_cacheflush (__ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE+2) > > -#define __ARM_NR_compat_set_tls (__ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE+5) > > +#define __ARM_NR_compat_cacheflush (__ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE + 2) > > +#define __ARM_NR_compat_set_tls (__ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE + 5) > > +#define __ARM_NR_compat_syscall_end (__ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE + 0x800) > > Nit: there is no compat_syscall_end(). Can we make this #define upper > case, like __ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE, since a symbolic bound, not a syscall > number? That's fair; I'll rename it to __ARM_NR_COMPAT_END. > > #define __NR_compat_syscalls 399 > > #endif > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/sys_compat.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/sys_compat.c > > index 32653d156747..5972b7533fa0 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/sys_compat.c > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/sys_compat.c > > @@ -102,12 +102,12 @@ long compat_arm_syscall(struct pt_regs *regs) > > > > default: > > /* > > - * Calls 9f00xx..9f07ff are defined to return -ENOSYS > > + * Calls 0xf0xxx..0xf07ff are defined to return -ENOSYS > > * if not implemented, rather than raising SIGILL. This > > * way the calling program can gracefully determine whether > > * a feature is supported. > > */ > > - if ((no & 0xffff) <= 0x7ff) > > + if (no < __ARM_NR_compat_syscall_end) > > arm_syscall() in arch/arm is not responsible for handling syscalls less > __ARM_NR_BASE; the code in entry-common.S redirects those directly to > sys_ni_syscall() instead. > > Given how fiddly this is I think it's preferable if we keep to the > arch/arm code structure as much as possible, and call this function only > when no >= __ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE? I don't think we should be using the arm code structure as a template here. Although we're providing the same interface, we don't have to worry about things like OABI or ARM vs THUMB entry code. We're also in the process of moving more of this out of assembly and into C, so I'd rather keep the compat code as self-contained as possible. Even if we did modify the caller so that we only call compat_arm_syscall() for numbers >= __ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE, we'd still need the check above to handle numbers >= __ARM_NR_COMPAT_END, so I don't think we gain anything. Will ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/3] arm64: compat: Avoid sending SIGILL for unallocated syscall numbers 2019-01-04 13:47 ` Will Deacon @ 2019-01-04 14:15 ` Dave Martin 0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Dave Martin @ 2019-01-04 14:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Will Deacon; +Cc: pihsun, stable, linux-arm-kernel On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 01:47:49PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 12:54:26PM +0000, Dave Martin wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 03, 2019 at 06:13:58PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > > > The ARM Linux kernel handles the EABI syscall numbers as follows: > > > > > > 0 - NR_SYSCALLS-1 : Invoke syscall via syscall table > > > NR_SYSCALLS - 0xeffff : -ENOSYS (to be allocated in future) > > > 0xf0000 - 0xf07ff : Private syscall or -ENOSYS if not allocated > > > > 0xf07ff : SIGILL > > > > > > Our compat code gets this wrong and ends up sending SIGILL in response > > > to all syscalls greater than NR_SYSCALLS which have a value greater > > > than 0x7ff in the bottom 16 bits. > > > > > > Fix this by defining the end of the ARM private syscall region and > > > checking the syscall number against that directly. Update the comment > > > while we're at it. > > > > > > Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> > > > Cc: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com> > > > Reported-by: Pi-Hsun Shih <pihsun@chromium.org> > > > Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> > > > --- > > > arch/arm64/include/asm/unistd.h | 5 +++-- > > > arch/arm64/kernel/sys_compat.c | 4 ++-- > > > 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/unistd.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/unistd.h > > > index b13ca091f833..be66a54ee3a1 100644 > > > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/unistd.h > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/unistd.h > > > @@ -40,8 +40,9 @@ > > > * The following SVCs are ARM private. > > > */ > > > #define __ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE 0x0f0000 > > > -#define __ARM_NR_compat_cacheflush (__ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE+2) > > > -#define __ARM_NR_compat_set_tls (__ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE+5) > > > +#define __ARM_NR_compat_cacheflush (__ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE + 2) > > > +#define __ARM_NR_compat_set_tls (__ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE + 5) > > > +#define __ARM_NR_compat_syscall_end (__ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE + 0x800) > > > > Nit: there is no compat_syscall_end(). Can we make this #define upper > > case, like __ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE, since a symbolic bound, not a syscall > > number? > > That's fair; I'll rename it to __ARM_NR_COMPAT_END. Thanks > > > > #define __NR_compat_syscalls 399 > > > #endif > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/sys_compat.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/sys_compat.c > > > index 32653d156747..5972b7533fa0 100644 > > > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/sys_compat.c > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/sys_compat.c > > > @@ -102,12 +102,12 @@ long compat_arm_syscall(struct pt_regs *regs) > > > > > > default: > > > /* > > > - * Calls 9f00xx..9f07ff are defined to return -ENOSYS > > > + * Calls 0xf0xxx..0xf07ff are defined to return -ENOSYS > > > * if not implemented, rather than raising SIGILL. This > > > * way the calling program can gracefully determine whether > > > * a feature is supported. > > > */ > > > - if ((no & 0xffff) <= 0x7ff) > > > + if (no < __ARM_NR_compat_syscall_end) > > > > arm_syscall() in arch/arm is not responsible for handling syscalls less > > __ARM_NR_BASE; the code in entry-common.S redirects those directly to > > sys_ni_syscall() instead. > > > > Given how fiddly this is I think it's preferable if we keep to the > > arch/arm code structure as much as possible, and call this function only > > when no >= __ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE? > > I don't think we should be using the arm code structure as a template here. > Although we're providing the same interface, we don't have to worry about > things like OABI or ARM vs THUMB entry code. We're also in the process of > moving more of this out of assembly and into C, so I'd rather keep the > compat code as self-contained as possible. > > Even if we did modify the caller so that we only call compat_arm_syscall() > for numbers >= __ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE, we'd still need the check above to > handle numbers >= __ARM_NR_COMPAT_END, so I don't think we gain anything. Well, I can live with it either way. Cross-referencing the arm64 and arm trees for this functionality is challenging, and will tend to get harder as the code diverges... but hopefully it's gone about as far as it's going to go by this point. Cheers ---Dave ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/3] arm64: compat: Don't pull syscall number from regs in arm_compat_syscall [not found] <1546539240-20647-1-git-send-email-will.deacon@arm.com> 2019-01-03 18:13 ` [PATCH 1/3] arm64: compat: Avoid sending SIGILL for unallocated syscall numbers Will Deacon @ 2019-01-03 18:13 ` Will Deacon 2019-01-04 12:37 ` Dave Martin 1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Will Deacon @ 2019-01-03 18:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel; +Cc: Dave.Martin, pihsun, Will Deacon, stable The syscall number may have been changed by a tracer, so we should pass the actual number in from the caller instead of pulling it from the saved r7 value directly. Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> Cc: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com> Cc: Pi-Hsun Shih <pihsun@chromium.org> Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> --- arch/arm64/kernel/sys_compat.c | 9 ++++----- arch/arm64/kernel/syscall.c | 9 ++++----- 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/sys_compat.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/sys_compat.c index 5972b7533fa0..54c29cd38ff9 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/sys_compat.c +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/sys_compat.c @@ -66,12 +66,11 @@ do_compat_cache_op(unsigned long start, unsigned long end, int flags) /* * Handle all unrecognised system calls. */ -long compat_arm_syscall(struct pt_regs *regs) +long compat_arm_syscall(struct pt_regs *regs, int scno) { - unsigned int no = regs->regs[7]; void __user *addr; - switch (no) { + switch (scno) { /* * Flush a region from virtual address 'r0' to virtual address 'r1' * _exclusive_. There is no alignment requirement on either address; @@ -107,7 +106,7 @@ long compat_arm_syscall(struct pt_regs *regs) * way the calling program can gracefully determine whether * a feature is supported. */ - if (no < __ARM_NR_compat_syscall_end) + if (scno < __ARM_NR_compat_syscall_end) return -ENOSYS; break; } @@ -116,6 +115,6 @@ long compat_arm_syscall(struct pt_regs *regs) (compat_thumb_mode(regs) ? 2 : 4); arm64_notify_die("Oops - bad compat syscall(2)", regs, - SIGILL, ILL_ILLTRP, addr, no); + SIGILL, ILL_ILLTRP, addr, scno); return 0; } diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/syscall.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/syscall.c index 032d22312881..5610ac01c1ec 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/syscall.c +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/syscall.c @@ -13,16 +13,15 @@ #include <asm/thread_info.h> #include <asm/unistd.h> -long compat_arm_syscall(struct pt_regs *regs); - +long compat_arm_syscall(struct pt_regs *regs, int scno); long sys_ni_syscall(void); -asmlinkage long do_ni_syscall(struct pt_regs *regs) +static long do_ni_syscall(struct pt_regs *regs, int scno) { #ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT long ret; if (is_compat_task()) { - ret = compat_arm_syscall(regs); + ret = compat_arm_syscall(regs, scno); if (ret != -ENOSYS) return ret; } @@ -47,7 +46,7 @@ static void invoke_syscall(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned int scno, syscall_fn = syscall_table[array_index_nospec(scno, sc_nr)]; ret = __invoke_syscall(regs, syscall_fn); } else { - ret = do_ni_syscall(regs); + ret = do_ni_syscall(regs, scno); } regs->regs[0] = ret; -- 2.1.4 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/3] arm64: compat: Don't pull syscall number from regs in arm_compat_syscall 2019-01-03 18:13 ` [PATCH 2/3] arm64: compat: Don't pull syscall number from regs in arm_compat_syscall Will Deacon @ 2019-01-04 12:37 ` Dave Martin 0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Dave Martin @ 2019-01-04 12:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Will Deacon; +Cc: linux-arm-kernel, stable, pihsun On Thu, Jan 03, 2019 at 06:13:59PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > The syscall number may have been changed by a tracer, so we should pass > the actual number in from the caller instead of pulling it from the > saved r7 value directly. Reviewed-by: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com> I was confused by the history here: commit 4141c857fd09 ("arm64: convert raw syscall invocation to C") breaks syscall changing via discarding the return from syscall_trace_enter() (which would also break this case for compat), but the subsequent patch that migrates the syscall code to C appears to fix it again. > > Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> > Cc: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com> > Cc: Pi-Hsun Shih <pihsun@chromium.org> > Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> > --- > arch/arm64/kernel/sys_compat.c | 9 ++++----- > arch/arm64/kernel/syscall.c | 9 ++++----- > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/sys_compat.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/sys_compat.c > index 5972b7533fa0..54c29cd38ff9 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/sys_compat.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/sys_compat.c > @@ -66,12 +66,11 @@ do_compat_cache_op(unsigned long start, unsigned long end, int flags) > /* > * Handle all unrecognised system calls. > */ > -long compat_arm_syscall(struct pt_regs *regs) > +long compat_arm_syscall(struct pt_regs *regs, int scno) > { > - unsigned int no = regs->regs[7]; > void __user *addr; > > - switch (no) { > + switch (scno) { > /* > * Flush a region from virtual address 'r0' to virtual address 'r1' > * _exclusive_. There is no alignment requirement on either address; > @@ -107,7 +106,7 @@ long compat_arm_syscall(struct pt_regs *regs) > * way the calling program can gracefully determine whether > * a feature is supported. > */ > - if (no < __ARM_NR_compat_syscall_end) > + if (scno < __ARM_NR_compat_syscall_end) > return -ENOSYS; > break; > } > @@ -116,6 +115,6 @@ long compat_arm_syscall(struct pt_regs *regs) > (compat_thumb_mode(regs) ? 2 : 4); > > arm64_notify_die("Oops - bad compat syscall(2)", regs, > - SIGILL, ILL_ILLTRP, addr, no); > + SIGILL, ILL_ILLTRP, addr, scno); > return 0; > } > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/syscall.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/syscall.c > index 032d22312881..5610ac01c1ec 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/syscall.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/syscall.c > @@ -13,16 +13,15 @@ > #include <asm/thread_info.h> > #include <asm/unistd.h> > > -long compat_arm_syscall(struct pt_regs *regs); > - > +long compat_arm_syscall(struct pt_regs *regs, int scno); > long sys_ni_syscall(void); > > -asmlinkage long do_ni_syscall(struct pt_regs *regs) > +static long do_ni_syscall(struct pt_regs *regs, int scno) > { > #ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT > long ret; > if (is_compat_task()) { > - ret = compat_arm_syscall(regs); > + ret = compat_arm_syscall(regs, scno); > if (ret != -ENOSYS) > return ret; > } > @@ -47,7 +46,7 @@ static void invoke_syscall(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned int scno, > syscall_fn = syscall_table[array_index_nospec(scno, sc_nr)]; > ret = __invoke_syscall(regs, syscall_fn); > } else { > - ret = do_ni_syscall(regs); > + ret = do_ni_syscall(regs, scno); > } > > regs->regs[0] = ret; > -- > 2.1.4 > > > _______________________________________________ > linux-arm-kernel mailing list > linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-01-04 14:15 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <1546539240-20647-1-git-send-email-will.deacon@arm.com>
2019-01-03 18:13 ` [PATCH 1/3] arm64: compat: Avoid sending SIGILL for unallocated syscall numbers Will Deacon
2019-01-04 12:54 ` Dave Martin
2019-01-04 13:47 ` Will Deacon
2019-01-04 14:15 ` Dave Martin
2019-01-03 18:13 ` [PATCH 2/3] arm64: compat: Don't pull syscall number from regs in arm_compat_syscall Will Deacon
2019-01-04 12:37 ` Dave Martin
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).