Re: [PATCHv4 5/6] Allow setting O_NONBLOCK flag for new sockets

[H. Peter Anvin]

Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > No.
> >
> > I already said I'm not looking at changing the calling convention for
> > existing syscalls.
>
> I did not suggest or ask for that at all.
>
> I was asking you to consider the real implementation details for a new
> syscall mechanism.
>
> We do not want to abandon the use of syscall/sysenter and go back to int
> (on x86/x86-64).  This means that you have to come up with a mechanism
> which hooks into the current syscall/sysenter path while preserving full
> backward compatibility.
>
> Now it's your turn.  How do you do this without additional costs?

- Add sys_new_call to the syscall table
- Create a stub thunk:

asmlinkage long sys_old_call(long parm1, long parm2, long parm3)
{
	return sys_new_call(parm1, parm2, parm3, 0);
}

We have 2^n examples on this in the kernel already.

Or, if the new syscall requires more than 6 parameters (with the current 
convention):

asmlinkage long sys_new_call6(long parm1, long parm2, long parm3,
			      long parm4, long parm5,
			      long __user *additional)
{
	long xparm[3];	/* 8 parameters, total */

	if (copy_from_user(xparm, additional, sizeof xparm)
	    != sizeof xparm)
		return -EFAULT;

	return sys_new_call(parm1, parm2, parm3, parm4, parm5,
			    xparm[0], xparm[1], xparm[2]);
}

This is a fixed-size copy from userspace, which obviously cannot be avoided.

The C version isn't optimal, obviously, hence my mentioning the 
possibility of doing it in the arch layer.

	-hpa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/