From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 5704 invoked from network); 20 May 2021 03:00:03 -0000 Received: from mother.openwall.net (195.42.179.200) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 20 May 2021 03:00:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 30052 invoked by uid 550); 20 May 2021 03:00:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com Received: (qmail 30020 invoked from network); 20 May 2021 02:59:59 -0000 Date: Thu, 20 May 2021 05:59:48 +0300 From: "Dmitry V. Levin" To: Nicholas Piggin Cc: Rich Felker , Joakim Tjernlund , linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Michael Ellerman , musl@lists.openwall.com, Segher Boessenkool Message-ID: <20210520025948.GA27081@altlinux.org> References: <1621410291.c7si38sa9q.astroid@bobo.none> <1621413143.oec64jaci5.astroid@bobo.none> <20210519143836.GJ10366@gate.crashing.org> <11d62aa2488e51ec00fe77f24a1d7cdcc21af0b8.camel@infinera.com> <20210519152205.GL10366@gate.crashing.org> <20210519234846.GS2546@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20210520010612.GA25599@altlinux.org> <1621478448.743zqcrxza.astroid@bobo.none> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1621478448.743zqcrxza.astroid@bobo.none> Subject: [musl] Re: Linux powerpc new system call instruction and ABI On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 12:45:57PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote: > Excerpts from Dmitry V. Levin's message of May 20, 2021 11:06 am: > > On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 07:48:47PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote: > >> On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 06:09:25PM +0000, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: > > [...] > >> > W.r.t breaking ABI, isn't that what PowerPC is trying to do with the new syscall I/F? > >> > >> No, it's a new independent interface. > > > > Unfortunately, being a new independent interface doesn't mean it isn't > > an ABI break. In fact, it was a severe ABI break, and this thread is > > an attempt to find a hotfix. > > It is an ABI break, that was known. The ptrace info stuff I fixed with > the patch earlier was obviously a bug in my initial implementation and > not intended (sorry my ptrace testing was not sufficient, and thanks for > reporting it, by the way). Could you check whether tools/testing/selftests/ptrace/get_syscall_info.c passes again with your fix, please? If yes, then PTRACE_GET_SYSCALL_INFO is fixed. By the way, kernel tracing and audit subsystems also use those functions from asm/syscall.h and asm/ptrace.h, so your ptrace fix is likely to fix these subsystems as well. -- ldv