Re: [PATCH 11/15] mips: fix n32 compat_ipc_parse_version

Hello, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > While reading through the sysvipc implementation, I noticed that the n32 > semctl/shmctl/msgctl system calls behave differently based on whether > o32 support is enabled or not: Without o32, the IPC_64 flag passed by > user space is rejected but calls without that fla

Re: [PATCH 11/15] mips: fix n32 compat_ipc_parse_version

On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 8:40 PM Paul Burton wrote: > On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 05:24:31PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > While reading through the sysvipc implementation, I noticed that the n32 > > semctl/shmctl/msgctl system calls behave differently based on whether > > o32 support is enabled or n

Re: [PATCH 11/15] mips: fix n32 compat_ipc_parse_version

Hi Arnd, On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 05:24:31PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > While reading through the sysvipc implementation, I noticed that the n32 > semctl/shmctl/msgctl system calls behave differently based on whether > o32 support is enabled or not: Without o32, the IPC_64 flag passed by > user

[PATCH 11/15] mips: fix n32 compat_ipc_parse_version

While reading through the sysvipc implementation, I noticed that the n32 semctl/shmctl/msgctl system calls behave differently based on whether o32 support is enabled or not: Without o32, the IPC_64 flag passed by user space is rejected but calls without that flag get IPC_64 behavior. As far as I c