On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 10:23 AM, Arnd Bergmann <a...@arndb.de> wrote:
> On Wednesday 18 November 2015 09:25:40 Andreas Schwab wrote:
>> Arnd Bergmann <a...@arndb.de> writes:
>>
>> > On Wednesday 18 November 2015 00:16:55 Yury Norov wrote:
>> >>
>> >> +/* IPC_64 */
>> >> +asmlinkage long ilp32_sys_msgctl(int first, int second, void __user
>> >> *uptr)
>> >> +{
>> >> + return compat_sys_msgctl(first, second | IPC_64, uptr);
>> >> +}
>> >> +#define compat_sys_msgctl ilp32_sys_msgctl
>> >> +
>> >> +asmlinkage long ilp32_sys_shmctl(int first, int second, void __user
>> >> *uptr)
>> >> +{
>> >> + return compat_sys_shmctl(first, second | IPC_64, uptr);
>> >> +}
>> >> +#define compat_sys_shmctl ilp32_sys_shmctl
>> >> +
>> >> +asmlinkage long ilp32_sys_semctl(int first, int second, int third, int
>> >> arg)
>> >> +{
>> >> + return compat_sys_semctl(first, second, third | IPC_64, arg);
>> >> +}
>> >> +#define compat_sys_semctl ilp32_sys_semctl
>> >>
>> >
>> > I wonder if this would be any simpler by changing
>> > compat_ipc_parse_version()
>>
>> This cries for a generic solution. Other archs migrating to separate
>> ipc syscalls will want to avoid the whole IPC_64 business for them, even
>> if they need to retain [compat_]ipc_parse_version for sys_ipc
>> compatibility.
>
> Agreed. I think all architectures are moving that way now, so we should
> really try to get all cases right now.
>
> I've done a complete list of what the architectures (see
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/18GxXEHE2ywnSr-SPoGFd1ABz6wEM1ex-JMu5lEraaH8/
> )
>
> We have these categories:
>
> 1. uses IPC_PARSE_VERSION with sys_ipc, and has just introduced
> separate syscalls:
>
> arm, avr32, powerpc, x86-32
x86-32, where?
> 2. uses IPC_PARSE_VERSION with sys_ipc, and has not yet introduced
> separate syscalls (currently producing a compile warning):
>
> cris, frv, m32r, m68k, mips (o32), mn10300, s390, sh32, sparc
>
> 3. uses IPC_PARSE_VERSION with separate syscalls:
>
> alpha, blackfin, microblaze, mips (n32/64), xtensa
>
> 4a. only new-style IPC with separate syscalls:
>
> ia64, parisc, sh64
and x86-64?
> 4b. only new-style IPC with separate syscalls, using generic syscall
> table:
>
> arc, arm64, c6x, h8300, hexagon, metag, nios2, openrisc, score,
> tile, unicore32
>
> So we should probably fix 1. and 2. before it's too late, but make
> sure we don't break 3. in the process.
(Fortunately?) x86-32 doesn't seem to be converted in next yet?
I was hoping for them to do the heavy lifting for the generic solution ;-)
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- ge...@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
