From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9905BC43466 for ; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 17:39:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DF7C20809 for ; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 17:39:38 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=amacapital-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@amacapital-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="yNPYVlEt" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 1DF7C20809 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=amacapital.net Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 1BA666B0037; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 13:39:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 143C76B0055; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 13:39:38 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 00ABA6B005A; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 13:39:37 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0240.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.240]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D947B6B0037 for ; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 13:39:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin30.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D6E2180AD802 for ; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 17:39:37 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 77280523194.30.store24_4d014ae27135 Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (10.5.16.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.16.251]) by smtpin30.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36303180B3C85 for ; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 17:39:37 +0000 (UTC) X-HE-Tag: store24_4d014ae27135 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 5206 Received: from mail-pg1-f194.google.com (mail-pg1-f194.google.com [209.85.215.194]) by imf09.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 17:39:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pg1-f194.google.com with SMTP id g29so5440193pgl.2 for ; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 10:39:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=amacapital-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version:subject:date:message-id :references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=VX3X8B9i2JuVY8GKzUZczdeUGgzu+mz4I4B7H1L1Mi4=; b=yNPYVlEt8KLUpDj0nIzrfQfQyOdEE2/k8kLlUB7RQ5n6+/jDfT84IduqimvSwqUnN+ O8cF1Vj9icMa6rtMohIfNPMBvBf+j5VOOL/nVKGeLwQaWHmre9d1e1eyeGjPlO0i185k 19M+FaJ2tfK5IgYz44rWxcBDCTmpp0Z3ZkuYLoAJ7sEpVZWAkov/AWsGiTkdIM78GAWZ 2SydI0qut+RoG6GfTRienTfRUllaANJil5Y4kTZKmgGH3olgwZI6GM0CUjDKWTHCvMx5 O22OBQlNd7hvBXTdnCIrUc+v+PA4zcggLM3FBA+YKoFQ9LtbqGzxxsi8TrAMrtNnfamF lVPA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version :subject:date:message-id:references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=VX3X8B9i2JuVY8GKzUZczdeUGgzu+mz4I4B7H1L1Mi4=; b=SjRZfL7MByzBQLPVoPTR+ol90PqBdQrdAmT3Qn6sYlj4zkGgNaSqOwzsVtmEuP42xj JAmcvkEAFiUjwvcKE0ZaqQeON81D3dWUp5C/9jB3ciRWPx2MvEVkIr2KUcYwLeuMM2sL zAJWXHRyNsh6gHAgp5awysC5SIiGpV8St3ZrkXqxkFtquwsUim0KyjdJObg4L2JeqZhw 1xdViY54vlpoxVluDcM5oN0HwIkWU2RlXVcXpdMiHFCVzzDYofOlSaomfDJqKbR25WKH T9VWX0pUnX1Hb/Idp+5octDu/DDsPbP8czrgX3VsunJs8oZadvTBN4KMMn2tIdnkyJYW 9WvA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532aRO1+g5UAbPd4KjEmfSfVC5BsIIqOcSWKi29Q3aS9Pk8pL3zg mhGxmyQNuoKAaBG4/6kSCss7+A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzr4nh4gV3U14vwhAcEwgphaAXOoSwKdUFhR57nYwWZfIBDT/DgQ4ly48zPilrTYeeOHRF+VQ== X-Received: by 2002:a63:725d:: with SMTP id c29mr8480027pgn.234.1600537175557; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 10:39:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([2601:646:c200:1ef2:384f:efa4:98e3:a556]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o19sm7291347pfp.64.2020.09.19.10.39.34 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 19 Sep 2020 10:39:34 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: Andy Lutomirski Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] x86: add __X32_COND_SYSCALL() macro Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2020 10:39:32 -0700 Message-Id: <027BAF5D-1473-4A35-8A58-D80315D52073@amacapital.net> References: <85F32523-4E9E-443A-A150-10A9E5EB0CE3@zytor.com> Cc: Andy Lutomirski , Christoph Hellwig , Arnd Bergmann , Alexander Viro , Eric Biederman , Andrew Morton , LKML , linux-arm-kernel , linux-arch , Linux-MM , kexec@lists.infradead.org, Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , Christoph Hellwig , Brian Gerst In-Reply-To: <85F32523-4E9E-443A-A150-10A9E5EB0CE3@zytor.com> To: hpa@zytor.com X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (18A373) X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: > On Sep 19, 2020, at 10:14 AM, hpa@zytor.com wrote: >=20 > =EF=BB=BFOn September 19, 2020 9:23:22 AM PDT, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >>> On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 10:35 PM Christoph Hellwig >>> wrote: >>>=20 >>> On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 03:24:36PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >>>> sys_move_pages() is an optional syscall, and once we remove >>>> the compat version of it in favor of the native one with an >>>> in_compat_syscall() check, the x32 syscall table refers to >>>> a __x32_sys_move_pages symbol that may not exist when the >>>> syscall is disabled. >>>>=20 >>>> Change the COND_SYSCALL() definition on x86 to also include >>>> the redirection for x32. >>>>=20 >>>> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann >>>=20 >>> Adding the x86 maintainers and Brian Gerst. Brian proposed another >>> problem to the mess that most of the compat syscall handlers used by >>> x32 here: >>>=20 >>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/6/16/664 >>>=20 >>> hpa didn't particularly like it, but with your and my pending series >>> we'll soon use more native than compat syscalls for x32, so something >>> will need to change.. >>=20 >> I'm fine with either solution. >=20 > My main objection was naming. x64 is a widely used synonym for x86-64, and= so that is confusing. >=20 >=20 The way I deal with the syscall wrappers is that I assume the naming makes n= o sense whatsoever, and I go from there. With this perspective, the patches a= re neither an improvement nor a worsening of the current situation. (Similarly, the last column of the tables is useless garbage. My last attem= pt to fix that stalled.)=