From: Serban Constantinescu <Serban.Constantinescu@arm.com>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"kernel-team@android.com" <kernel-team@android.com>,
"arve@android.com" <arve@android.com>,
"john.stultz@linaro.org" <john.stultz@linaro.org>,
Dave Butcher <Dave.Butcher@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] staging: android: ashmem: fix ashmem pin/unpin interface
Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2013 10:54:41 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <510F9371.1060704@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130204014114.GA14058@kroah.com>
On 04/02/13 01:41, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 04:55:01PM +0000, Serban Constantinescu wrote:
>> Hi Greg,
>>
>> On 01/02/13 16:18, Greg KH wrote:
>>> On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 04:08:00PM +0000, Serban Constantinescu wrote:
>>>> The values exchanged between kernel and userspace through struct
>>>> ashmem_pin should be of type size_t. This change won't affect the
>>>> existing interface but will stand as the basis of 64bit compat layer.
>>>
>>> How do you define size_t with a 64bit kernel and a 32bit userspace
>>> properly? Doesn't this change open up a bunch of problems?
>>
>> The current ashmem pin/unpin kernel interface uses __u32 to specify
>> the memory region and length in bytes. However these values should
>> be of type size_t so that they are able to represent the whole range
>> of possible values when compiled for a 64bit platform.
>
> Yes, the issue is, what size is size_t on the system if you have a 32bit
> userspace and a 64bit kernel? :)
>
> That's why we have specific types for when we cross the user/kernel
> boundry. Why not use them instead here so that you know it will work
> properly in the future?
The patch set was developed using size_t to avoid the use of a #ifdef
statement that would split the use for 64bit platforms using u64 and
32bit using u32. On a 64/32 system you will have a 32bit size_t in the
user space and a 64bit size_t in the kernel. However in the kernel entry
- compat_ashmem_ioctl we explicitly cast from compat_size_t (32bit -
same as the userspace) to size_t (64bit used by the kernel).
> 695 pin.offset = (size_t)c_pin.offset;
> 696 pin.len = (size_t)c_pin.len;
Same logic was applied for existing size_t ioctls:
> 46 #define ASHMEM_SET_SIZE _IOW(__ASHMEMIOC, 3, size_t)
where on a 64/32 system you are using:
> 57 #define COMPAT_ASHMEM_SET_SIZE _IOW(__ASHMEMIOC, 3,
compat_size_t)
This kernel header is not intended to be exported for current Android
userspace (even though we have tested this with success on one of the
latest Android revisions).
>> Android API uses ashmem driver through libcutils, from where I
>> attach the following snippet:
>>
>> <aosp>/system/core/libcutils/ashmem-dev.c
>>
>> 75 int ashmem_pin_region(int fd, size_t offset, size_t len)
>> 76 {
>> 77 struct ashmem_pin pin = { offset, len };
>> 78 return ioctl(fd, ASHMEM_PIN, &pin);
>> 79 }
>
> Again, the 32/64 bit issue is to blame.
>
>> The kernel changes inline with the userspace usage and do not affect
>> existing 32bit Android (we have exported the new kernel header,
>> rebuilt and tested the interface with success).
>>
>> However this change will affect any 64bit userspace using the
>> current faulty interface, but there is none that we know of.
>
> I'd like the Android developers to give some feedback on this, before
> I'll do anything. I still think you need to change this to use the
> proper kernel types.
If you or the Android developers consider the use of #ifdef u64/u32 is
better I will rework the patch accordingly.
Thanks,
Serban Constantinescu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-02-04 10:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-02-01 16:07 [PATCH 0/2] staging: android: ashmem: add 32bit compat support Serban Constantinescu
2013-02-01 16:08 ` [PATCH 1/2] staging: android: ashmem: fix ashmem pin/unpin interface Serban Constantinescu
2013-02-01 16:18 ` Greg KH
2013-02-01 16:55 ` Serban Constantinescu
2013-02-04 1:41 ` Greg KH
2013-02-04 10:54 ` Serban Constantinescu [this message]
2013-02-01 16:08 ` [PATCH 2/2] staging: android: ashmem: Add support for 32bit ashmem calls in a 64bit kernel Serban Constantinescu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=510F9371.1060704@arm.com \
--to=serban.constantinescu@arm.com \
--cc=Dave.Butcher@arm.com \
--cc=arve@android.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=john.stultz@linaro.org \
--cc=kernel-team@android.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome