From: "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@arndb.de>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"André Almeida" <andrealmeid@igalia.com>
Cc: "Dave Hansen" <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
"Borislav Petkov" <bp@alien8.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org,
kernel-dev@igalia.com, "Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@kernel.org>,
"Nathan Chancellor" <nathan@kernel.org>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/4] syscalls: Create unified partial table for all archs
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2026 10:25:49 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <97cafb31-fd66-47a3-bc1d-d335c25d9523@app.fastmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <D43E56E4-209C-4E77-97EA-C62DE6D7BBC2@zytor.com>
On Fri, Jul 24, 2026, at 23:22, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On July 24, 2026 1:25:05 PM PDT, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
>>> It will wrongly add
>>>
>>> __SYSCALL_WITH_COMPAT(441, sys_epoll_pwait2, compat_sys_epoll_pwait2)
>>>
>>> to arch/x86/include/generated/asm/syscalls_64.h.
>>>
>>> Maybe I could add a --ignore-compat to scripts/syscalltbl.sh, and add
>>> this flag for 64 builds. What do you think?
>>
>>IIRC, we can just use compat_sys_epoll_pwait2 for both i386
>>and x32, because compat_sigset_t is compatible with sigset_t --
>>they are only really different on big-endian targets, which
>>count the bits in a u64 different from two u32.
>>
>>This problem also goes away once x32 is gone.
>
> No reason to introduce another entry point if there's no difference.
>
> x86, after all, is littleendian and alignment-tolerant.
What I meant was the reverse: if the common table has the
compat_sys_epoll_pwait2 entry for compat targets and x32 is
the only outlier, we don't need a special case for that
to force it to use the sys_epoll_pwait2 variant since they
are identical on x86.
Looking again at the x86 table, I see that x32 is not even
described as a compat target and just takes the second (native
64-bit) argument of __SYSCALL_WITH_COMPAT() instead of third
anyway, so there wouldn't even be a problem if native
and compat were different.
Arnd
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-25 8:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-24 20:00 [PATCH RFC 0/4] syscalls: Add a shared " André Almeida
2026-07-24 20:00 ` [PATCH RFC 1/4] syscalls: Create unified partial " André Almeida
2026-07-24 20:09 ` Arnd Bergmann
2026-07-24 20:18 ` André Almeida
2026-07-24 20:25 ` Arnd Bergmann
2026-07-24 21:22 ` H. Peter Anvin
2026-07-25 8:25 ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2026-07-24 20:00 ` [PATCH RFC 2/4] syscalls: Add support for x86_x32 for the common syscall table André Almeida
2026-07-24 20:16 ` Arnd Bergmann
2026-07-24 20:00 ` [PATCH RFC 3/4] x86: Use " André Almeida
2026-07-24 20:00 ` [PATCH RFC 4/4] scripts/syscall.tbl: Use the common table André Almeida
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=97cafb31-fd66-47a3-bc1d-d335c25d9523@app.fastmail.com \
--to=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=andrealmeid@igalia.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=kernel-dev@igalia.com \
--cc=linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®