Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2015 16:14:26 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
cc: y2038@lists.linaro.org, Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linaro.org>,
        pang.xunlei@linaro.org, peterz@infradead.org, benh@kernel.crashing.org,
        heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com, paulus@samba.org, cl@linux.com,
        heenasirwani@gmail.com, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au,
        rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com, ahh@google.com, fweisbec@gmail.com,
        pjt@google.com, riel@redhat.com, richardcochran@gmail.com,
        schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, john.stultz@linaro.org, rth@twiddle.net,
        gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, tj@kernel.org, linux390@de.ibm.com,
        linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [Y2038] [PATCH 04/11] posix timers:Introduce the 64bit methods
 with timespec64 type for k_clock structure
In-Reply-To: <3755355.Xf0HbltZXg@wuerfel>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1504211528040.13914@nanos>
References: <1429509459-17068-1-git-send-email-baolin.wang@linaro.org> <1429509459-17068-5-git-send-email-baolin.wang@linaro.org> <alpine.DEB.2.11.1504202131500.13914@nanos> <3755355.Xf0HbltZXg@wuerfel>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (DEB 23 2013-08-11)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1926
Lines: 48

On Tue, 21 Apr 2015, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > COMPAT_SYSCALL_DEFINE2(timer_gettime, timer_t, timer_id,
> >                        struct compat_itimerspec __user *, setting)
> 
> As a side note, I want to kill off the get_fs()/set_fs() calls in
> the process. These always make me dizzy when I try to work out whether
> there is a potential security hole (there is not in this case), and
> they can be slow on some architectures.

Yeah. I have to take a deep breath every time I look at those :)
 
> My preferred solution is one where we end up with the same syscalls
> for both 32-bit and 64-bit, and basically use the
> compat_sys_timer_gettime() implementation (or a simplified version)
> for the existing , something like this:

No objections from my side. I was not looking into the syscall magic
yet. I just wanted to avoid the code churn and have the guts of the
syscalls factored out for simple reusage.

....
 
> Note the use of a separate __kernel_itimerspec64 for the user interface
> here, which I think will be needed to hide the differences between the
> normal itimerspec on 64-bit machines, and the new itimerspec on 32-bit
> platforms that will be defined differently (using 'long long').

Confused.

timespec64 / itimerspec64 should be the same independent of 64bit and
32bit. So why do we need another variant ?

> I would also prefer not too many people to work on the syscalls, and
> would rather have Baolin not touch any of the syscall prototypes for
> the moment.

I did not ask him to change any of the syscall prototypes. I just
wanted him to split out the guts of the syscall into a seperate static
function to avoid all that code churn.

Thanks,

	tglx
--
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/