It's been a while since the un-muxed socket and ipc syscalls were
introduced, so make the unistd.h number definitions visible for
non-EABI as well as EABI.
Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>
Patch from Nicolas Pitre
With EABI the multiplex sys_ipc and sys_socketcall syscalls are
unavailable and their support code even removed from the compiled
kernel, and the new unmuxed syscalls must be used instead.
Make those syscall numbers visible.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>
Patch from Nicolas Pitre
This patch adds the required code to support both user space ABIs at
the same time. A second syscall table is created to include legacy ABI
syscalls that need an ABI compat wrapper.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>
Patch from Nicolas Pitre
For a while we wanted to change the way syscalls were called on ARM.
Instead of encoding the syscall number in the swi instruction which
requires reading back the instruction from memory to extract that number
and polluting the data cache, it was decided that simply storing the
syscall number into r7 would be more efficient. Since this represents
an ABI change then making that change at the same time as EABI support
is the right thing to do.
It is now expected that EABI user space binaries put the syscall number
into r7 and use "swi 0" to call the kernel. Syscall register argument
are also expected to have "EABI arrangement" i.e. 64-bit arguments
should be put in a pair of registers from an even register number.
Example with long ftruncate64(unsigned int fd, loff_t length):
legacy ABI:
- put fd into r0
- put length into r1-r2
- use "swi #(0x900000 + 194)" to call the kernel
new ARM EABI:
- put fd into r0
- put length into r2-r3 (skipping over r1)
- put 194 into r7
- use "swi 0" to call the kernel
Note that it is important to use 0 for the swi argument as backward
compatibility with legacy ABI user space relies on this.
The syscall macros in asm-arm/unistd.h were also updated to support
both ABIs and implement the right call method automatically.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>
Make sure we always return, as all syscalls should. Also move the common
prototype to <linux/syscalls.h>
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Patch from Nicolas Pitre
The prototype for sys_fadvise64_64() is:
long sys_fadvise64_64(int fd, loff_t offset, loff_t len, int advice)
The argument list is therefore as follows on legacy ABI:
fd: type int (r0)
offset: type long long (r1-r2)
len: type long long (r3-sp[0])
advice: type int (sp[4])
With EABI this becomes:
fd: type int (r0)
offset: type long long (r2-r3)
len: type long long (sp[0]-sp[4])
advice: type int (sp[8])
Not only do we have ABI differences here, but the EABI version requires
one additional word on the syscall stack.
To avoid the ABI mismatch and the extra stack space required with EABI
this syscall is now defined with a different argument ordering
on ARM as follows:
long sys_arm_fadvise64_64(int fd, int advice, loff_t offset, loff_t len)
This gives us the following ABI independent argument distribution:
fd: type int (r0)
advice: type int (r1)
offset: type long long (r2-r3)
len: type long long (sp[0]-sp[4])
Now, since the syscall entry code takes care of 5 registers only by
default including the store of r4 to the stack, we need a wrapper to
store r5 to the stack as well. Because that wrapper was missing and was
always required this means that sys_fadvise64_64 never worked on ARM and
therefore we can safely reuse its syscall number for our new
sys_arm_fadvise64_64 interface.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>
Patch from Nicolas Pitre
There is no need to define __ARCH_WANT_SYS_FADVISE64 on ARM since it
only serves to compile in a compatibility wrapper for sys_fadvise64
which never was tied to any syscall number.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>
Patch from Nicolas Pitre
This patch entirely reworks the kernel assistance for NPTL on ARM.
In particular this provides an efficient way to retrieve the TLS
value and perform atomic operations without any instruction emulation
nor special system call. This even allows for pre ARMv6 binaries to
be forward compatible with SMP systems without any penalty.
The problematic and performance critical operations are performed
through segment of kernel provided user code reachable from user space
at a fixed address in kernel memory. Those fixed entry points are
within the vector page so we basically get it for free as no extra
memory page is required and nothing else may be mapped at that
location anyway.
This is different from (but doesn't preclude) a full blown VDSO
implementation, however a VDSO would prevent some assembly tricks with
constants that allows for efficient branching to those code segments.
And since those code segments only use a few cycles before returning to
user code, the overhead of a VDSO far call would add a significant
overhead to such minimalistic operations.
The ARM_NR_set_tls syscall also changed number. This is done for two
reasons:
1) this patch changes the way the TLS value was previously meant to be
retrieved, therefore we ensure whatever library using the old way
gets fixed (they only exist in private tree at the moment since the
NPTL work is still progressing).
2) the previous number was allocated in a range causing an undefined
instruction trap on kernels not supporting that syscall and it was
determined that allocating it in a range returning -ENOSYS would be
much nicer for libraries trying to determine if the feature is
present or not.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre
Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>
Initial git repository build. I'm not bothering with the full history,
even though we have it. We can create a separate "historical" git
archive of that later if we want to, and in the meantime it's about
3.2GB when imported into git - space that would just make the early
git days unnecessarily complicated, when we don't have a lot of good
infrastructure for it.
Let it rip!
