[PATCH v6 12/20] arm64:ilp32: add sys_ilp32.c and a separate table (in entry.S) to use it
From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann)
Date: 2015-12-21 22:14:49
Also in:
lkml
On Monday 21 December 2015, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote:
quoted
On 18 Dec 2015, at 13:47, Arnd Bergmann [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
3. Follow the PCS up to glibc but always pass syscall arguments in W registers, like AArch32 compat support (the least preferred option, the only advantage is a single wrapper for all syscalls but it would be doing unnecessary zeroing even for syscalls where it isn't needed)This would mean we cannot pass 64-bit arguments in registers, right?Note that there?s no 32bit registers (the ?w?-form always refers to the lower 32bits of a 64bit register, with implicit zero-extension)? and load/store instructions always use the full base-register (?x?-form) for address calculation. I.e. a load/store would inadvertently pickup ?random garbage? in the upper 32bits, if no explicit zero-extension is applied. In other words: all zero-extensions for 32bit arguments should be explicit on the kernel side.
I think that is what Catalin meant with the single wrapper in the description: the kernel always zeroes out the upper 32 bits in the initial trap, and then we only need to do sign-extensions for the few cases that need it, and pass 64-bit arguments in two lower halves. In contrast, approach 1 adds a separate wrapper for each syscall that takes care of both sign-extending where necessary and zero-extending all othe 32-bit arguments but not the 64-bit arguments. Arnd