RE: [PATCH] x86: Wire up 32-bit direct socket calls

All the mail mirrored from lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
To: "'H. Peter Anvin'" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Cc: X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
	Network Development <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho  <tuliom@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Alexander Larsson <alexl@redhat.com>,
	Cosimo Cecchi <cosimo@endlessm.com>,
	Dan Nicholson <nicholson@endlessm.com>,
	libc-alpha <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>,
	"Rajalakshmi Srinivasaraghavan" <raji@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Linux-Arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] x86: Wire up 32-bit direct socket calls
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2015 10:06:24 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <063D6719AE5E284EB5DD2968C1650D6D1CB8CE25@AcuExch.aculab.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <55E75913.5050605@zytor.com>

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8", Size: 757 bytes --]

From: Peter Anvin
> Sent: 02 September 2015 21:16
> On 09/02/2015 02:48 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >
> > Should all other architectures follow suit?
> > Or should we follow the s390 approach:
> >
> 
> It is up to the maintainer(s), largely dependent on how likely you are
> going to want to support this in your libc, but in general, socketcall
> is an abomination which there is no reason not to bypass.

The other (worse) abomination is the way SCTP overloads setsockopt()
to perform actions that change state.
Rather unfortunately that got documented in the protocol standard :-(

	David

ÿôèº{.nÇ+‰·Ÿ®‰†+%ŠËÿ±éÝ¶\x17¥Šwÿº{.nÇ+‰·¥Š{±þG«éÿŠ{ayº\x1dÊ‡Ú™ë,j\a¢f£¢·hšïêÿ‘êçz_è®\x03(éšŽŠÝ¢j"ú\x1a¶^[m§ÿÿ¾\a«þG«éÿ¢¸?™¨èÚ&£ø§~á¶iO•æ¬z·švØ^\x14\x04\x1a¶^[m§ÿÿÃ\fÿ¶ìÿ¢¸?–I¥

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)

From: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
To: "'H. Peter Anvin'" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Cc: X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
	Network Development <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho <tuliom@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Alexander Larsson <alexl@redhat.com>,
	Cosimo Cecchi <cosimo@endlessm.com>,
	Dan Nicholson <nicholson@endlessm.com>,
	libc-alpha <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>,
	"Rajalakshmi Srinivasaraghavan" <raji@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Linux-Arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] x86: Wire up 32-bit direct socket calls
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2015 10:06:24 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <063D6719AE5E284EB5DD2968C1650D6D1CB8CE25@AcuExch.aculab.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <55E75913.5050605@zytor.com>

From: Peter Anvin
> Sent: 02 September 2015 21:16
> On 09/02/2015 02:48 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >
> > Should all other architectures follow suit?
> > Or should we follow the s390 approach:
> >
> 
> It is up to the maintainer(s), largely dependent on how likely you are
> going to want to support this in your libc, but in general, socketcall
> is an abomination which there is no reason not to bypass.

The other (worse) abomination is the way SCTP overloads setsockopt()
to perform actions that change state.
Rather unfortunately that got documented in the protocol standard :-(

	David

next prev parent reply	other threads:[~2015-09-03 10:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-07-14 22:24 [PATCH] x86: Wire up 32-bit direct socket calls Andy Lutomirski
2015-07-21  9:41 ` [tip:x86/asm] x86/entry/syscalls: " tip-bot for Andy Lutomirski
2015-09-02  9:48 ` [PATCH] x86: " Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-09-02 20:16   ` H. Peter Anvin
2015-09-03 10:06     ` David Laight [this message]
2015-09-03 10:06       ` David Laight
2015-09-07 12:53     ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-09-11  8:24       ` Heiko Carstens
2015-09-11  8:46         ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-09-11  9:54           ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-09-11 10:14             ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-09-11 16:32               ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-09-14 13:35                 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-09-15 20:55                   ` H. Peter Anvin

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=063D6719AE5E284EB5DD2968C1650D6D1CB8CE25@AcuExch.aculab.com \
    --to=david.laight@aculab.com \
    --cc=alexl@redhat.com \
    --cc=cosimo@endlessm.com \
    --cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luto@amacapital.net \
    --cc=luto@kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nicholson@endlessm.com \
    --cc=raji@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=tuliom@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=x86@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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.