Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 09:12:34 +0100
From: Szabolcs Nagy <>
To:, Rich Felker <>,
	Andrew Pinski <>,
	"" <>,
	"" <>,
	"" <>,
	"" <>,
	Marcus Shawcroft <>
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCHv3 00/24] ILP32 support in ARM64

* Szabolcs Nagy <> [2015-02-11 20:05:37 +0100]:
> (i think this is also a problem if userspace code uses syscall(2) directly,
> libc cannot possibly know where to signextend and the kernel side does not
> do the fixup right now)

nobody picked up this issue, is this resolved?

ie. if userspace calls syscall(SYS_foo,...) directly with 32bit
longs does it always work out correctly on the kernel side?

the sign extension is a problem for signed long arguments,
i only found these in the kernel:

fs/buffer.c:SYSCALL_DEFINE2(bdflush, int, func, long, data)

fs/open.c:SYSCALL_DEFINE2(truncate, const char __user *, path, long, length)

fs/aio.c:SYSCALL_DEFINE3(io_submit, aio_context_t, ctx_id, long, nr,
fs/aio.c-               struct iocb __user * __user *, iocbpp)

fs/aio.c:SYSCALL_DEFINE5(io_getevents, aio_context_t, ctx_id,
fs/aio.c-               long, min_nr,
fs/aio.c-               long, nr,

kernel/ptrace.c:SYSCALL_DEFINE4(ptrace, long, request, long, pid, unsigned long, addr,
kernel/ptrace.c-                unsigned long, data)

ipc/syscall.c:SYSCALL_DEFINE6(ipc, unsigned int, call, int, first, unsigned long, second,
ipc/syscall.c-          unsigned long, third, void __user *, ptr, long, fifth)

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.