On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 09:07:03AM +0200, Marcin Nowakowski wrote:
> On 11.10.2016 15:36, Will Deacon wrote:
> >On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 12:42:52PM +0200, Marcin Nowakowski wrote:
> >>diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/unistd.h
> >>index e78ac26..276d049 100644
> >>--- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/unistd.h
> >>+++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/unistd.h
> >>@@ -45,6 +45,7 @@
> >> #define __ARM_NR_compat_set_tls (__ARM_NR_COMPAT_BASE+5)
> >> #define __NR_compat_syscalls 394
> >>+#define NR_compat_syscalls (__NR_compat_syscalls)
> >We may as well just define NR_compat_syscalls instead of
> >__NR_compat_syscalls and move the handful of users over.
> I had tried to minimise the amount of arch-specific changes here -
> especially those that are not directly related to the proposed syscall
> handling change. But I agree having these 2 #defines is a bit unnecessary
There's only three users of __NR_compat_syscalls, so I think you can
move them over.
> >>diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/ftrace.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/ftrace.c
> >>index 40ad08a..75d010f 100644
> >>--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/ftrace.c
> >>+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/ftrace.c
> >>@@ -176,4 +176,20 @@ int ftrace_disable_ftrace_graph_caller(void)
> >> return ftrace_modify_graph_caller(false);
> >> }
> >> #endif /* CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE */
> >> #endif /* CONFIG_FUNCTION_GRAPH_TRACER */
> >>+#if (defined CONFIG_FTRACE_SYSCALLS) && (defined CONFIG_COMPAT)
> >>+extern const void *sys_call_table;
> >>+extern const void *compat_sys_call_table;
> >>+unsigned long __init arch_syscall_addr(int nr, bool compat)
> >>+ if (compat)
> >>+ return (unsigned long)compat_sys_call_table[nr];
> >>+ return (unsigned long)sys_call_table[nr];
> >Do we care about the compat private syscalls (from base 0x0f0000)? We
> >need to make sure that we exhibit the same behaviour as a native
> >32-bit ARM machine.
> Tracing of such syscalls has been disabled for a long time (see
> Apart from using non-contiguous numbers, they are not defined using standard
> SYSCALL macros, so they do not have any metadata generated either.
> My suggestion is that if you wanted those to be included in the trace then
> it should be done separately from these changes.
Fine by me -- I just wanted to make sure our compat behaviour matched
the behaviour of native arch/arm/. It sounds like it does, so no need to
change anything here.
Acked-by: Will Deacon <will.dea...@arm.com>