[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210520025948.GA27081@altlinux.org>
Date: Thu, 20 May 2021 05:59:48 +0300
From: "Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@...linux.org>
To: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>
Cc: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>,
Joakim Tjernlund <Joakim.Tjernlund@...inera.com>,
linux-api@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>, musl@...ts.openwall.com,
Segher Boessenkool <segher@...nel.crashing.org>
Subject: Re: Linux powerpc new system call instruction and ABI
On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 12:45:57PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> Excerpts from Dmitry V. Levin's message of May 20, 2021 11:06 am:
> > On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 07:48:47PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote:
> >> On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 06:09:25PM +0000, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > [...]
> >> > W.r.t breaking ABI, isn't that what PowerPC is trying to do with the new syscall I/F?
> >>
> >> No, it's a new independent interface.
> >
> > Unfortunately, being a new independent interface doesn't mean it isn't
> > an ABI break. In fact, it was a severe ABI break, and this thread is
> > an attempt to find a hotfix.
>
> It is an ABI break, that was known. The ptrace info stuff I fixed with
> the patch earlier was obviously a bug in my initial implementation and
> not intended (sorry my ptrace testing was not sufficient, and thanks for
> reporting it, by the way).
Could you check whether tools/testing/selftests/ptrace/get_syscall_info.c
passes again with your fix, please?
If yes, then PTRACE_GET_SYSCALL_INFO is fixed.
By the way, kernel tracing and audit subsystems also use those functions
from asm/syscall.h and asm/ptrace.h, so your ptrace fix is likely to fix
these subsystems as well.
--
ldv
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
