lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Jan]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: in_compat_syscall() on x86
Date
Copy x86@kernel.org

> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
> Sent: 04 January 2021 12:17
> To: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>; Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: in_compat_syscall() on x86
>
> On x86 in_compat_syscall() is defined as:
> in_ia32_syscall() || in_x32_syscall()
>
> Now in_ia32_syscall() is a simple check of the TS_COMPAT flag.
> However in_x32_syscall() is a horrid beast that has to indirect
> through to the original %eax value (ie the syscall number) and
> check for a bit there.
>
> So on a kernel with x32 support (probably most distro kernels)
> the in_compat_syscall() check is rather more expensive than
> one might expect.
>
> It would be muck better if both checks could be done together.
> I think this would require the syscall entry code to set a
> value in both the 64bit and x32 entry paths.
> (Can a process make both 64bit and x32 system calls?)
>
> To do this sensible (probably) requires a byte be allocated
> to hold the syscall type - rather than using flag bits
> in the 'status' field.
>
> Apart from the syscall entry, the exec code seems to change
> the syscall type to that of the binary being executed.
> I didn't spot anything else that changes the fields.
>
> But I failed to find the full list of allocated bits for
> the 'status' field.
>
> David
>
> -
> Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
> Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-01-04 17:49    [W:0.060 / U:1.740 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site