Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758497AbaGAQtO (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Jul 2014 12:49:14 -0400 Received: from fw-tnat.austin.arm.com ([217.140.110.23]:41670 "EHLO collaborate-mta1.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758467AbaGAQtM (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Jul 2014 12:49:12 -0400 Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2014 17:49:02 +0100 From: Catalin Marinas To: "Pinski, Andrew" Cc: Andrew Pinski , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH 22/24] ARM64:ILP32: Use a seperate syscall table as a few syscalls need to be using the compat syscalls. Message-ID: <20140701164902.GT18313@arm.com> References: <1400914939-9708-1-git-send-email-apinski@cavium.com> <1400914939-9708-23-git-send-email-apinski@cavium.com> <20140701150539.GA18309@arm.com> <800835FF-E10A-4C0C-A68F-0ED1434F1CE2@caviumnetworks.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <800835FF-E10A-4C0C-A68F-0ED1434F1CE2@caviumnetworks.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 04:30:51PM +0100, Pinski, Andrew wrote: > On Jul 1, 2014, at 8:07 AM, "Catalin Marinas" wrote: > > On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 12:02:17AM -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote: > >> +/* Using Compat syscalls where necessary */ > >> +#define sys_ioctl compat_sys_ioctl > >> +/* iovec */ > >> +#define sys_readv compat_sys_readv > >> +#define sys_writev compat_sys_writev > >> +#define sys_preadv compat_sys_preadv64 > >> +#define sys_pwritev compat_sys_pwritev64 > >> +#define sys_vmsplice compat_sys_vmsplice > > > > Do these actually work? compat_iovec has two members of 32-bit each > > while the ILP32 iovec has a void * (32-bit) and a __kernel_size_t which > > is 64-bit. > > size_t should be unsigned long in ilp32 so a 32bit unsigned integer > type. That part of the abi was already defined in the arm abi > documents. Now are saying we should pass size_t different between > user and kernel space? OK, I think you are right here. The ILP32 would not see __kernel_size_t defined as __kernel_ulong_t because __BITS_PER_LONG != 64. > >> +/* Pointer in struct */ > >> +#define sys_mount compat_sys_mount > > > > Which structure is this? > > NFS structure, I can expand out the comment if needed. That would be good for future reference. Thanks. -- Catalin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/