On Thu, 2014-11-06 at 09:02 +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 4:53 AM, Ben Hutchings <b...@decadent.org.uk> wrote:
[...]
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/syscall_64.c b/arch/x86/kernel/syscall_64.c
> > index 4ac730b..7a6e66f 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/syscall_64.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/syscall_64.c
>
> > +static int __init x32_enable(void)
> > +{
> > + BUG_ON(system_call_fast_compare_end - system_call_fast_compare !=
> > 10);
> > + BUG_ON(system_call_trace_compare_end - system_call_trace_compare !=
> > 10);
> > + BUG_ON(system_call_mask_compare_end - system_call_mask_compare !=
> > 10);
>
> BUILD_BUG_ON
No, these can't be evaluated at compile time because the symbols are
external.
> > +
> > + if (x32_enabled) {
> > + text_poke_early(system_call_fast_compare,
> > + system_call_mask_compare, 10);
> > + text_poke_early(system_call_trace_compare,
> > + system_call_mask_compare, 10);
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_X32_DISABLED
> > + pr_info("Enabled x32 syscalls\n");
> > +#endif
>
> I don't think it hurts to print this unconditionally.
[...]
It seemed like it would be unnecessary noise in an x32-only system.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
Beware of programmers who carry screwdrivers. - Leonard Brandwein
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
