Page MenuHomeFreeBSD
Differential D25272 Diff 73152 sys/amd64/linux/linux_machdep.c

Changeset View

Standalone View

View Options

sys/amd64/linux/linux_machdep.c

Show First 20 Lines • Show All 135 Lines • ▼ Show 20 Lines
int int
linux_mprotect(struct thread *td, struct linux_mprotect_args *uap) linux_mprotect(struct thread *td, struct linux_mprotect_args *uap)
{ {
return (linux_mprotect_common(td, PTROUT(uap->addr), uap->len, uap->prot)); return (linux_mprotect_common(td, PTROUT(uap->addr), uap->len, uap->prot));
} }
int int
linux_madvise(struct thread *td, struct linux_madvise_args *uap)
{
return (linux_madvise_common(td, PTROUT(uap->addr), uap->len, uap->behav));
brooksUnsubmitted
Not Done
Inline Actions

PTROUT is an odd choice here, it's not meant for this purpose. Just casting to uintptr_t seems like more the right thing.

brooks: `PTROUT` is an odd choice here, it's not meant for this purpose. Just casting to `uintptr_t`…
traszAuthorUnsubmitted
Done
Inline Actions

This simply follows the code that's already there. However, I'm not sure what is the purpose of PTROUT - generally speaking, not just here; how is it different from just a uintptr_t typecast?

trasz: This simply follows the code that's already there. However, I'm not sure what is the purpose…
brooksUnsubmitted
Not Done
Inline Actions

PTROUT is for cases where a pointer type is to be assigned to an integer when converting between struct types. e.g.:

struct foo {
  void *ptr;
  ...
};
struct foo32 {
  int32_t ptr;
  ...
};

void
foo2foo32(const struct foo *foo, struct foo32 *foo32)
{
  foo32->ptr = PTROUT(foo->ptr);
  ...
}

In practice PTROUT is almost always a sign of a bad API.

brooks: PTROUT is for cases where a pointer type is to be assigned to an integer when converting…
traszAuthorUnsubmitted
Done
Inline Actions

Thank you, that makes sense.

I think I'd prefer going with the current state of code - with PTROUT, simply because of consistency with the code around it, which uses it all over the place - and then open a separate review to remove it throughout the linuxulator. Is that ok?

trasz: Thank you, that makes sense. I think I'd prefer going with the current state of code - with…
}
int
linux_iopl(struct thread *td, struct linux_iopl_args *args) linux_iopl(struct thread *td, struct linux_iopl_args *args)
{ {
int error; int error;
LINUX_CTR(iopl); LINUX_CTR(iopl);
if (args->level > 3) if (args->level > 3)
return (EINVAL); return (EINVAL);
▲ Show 20 Lines • Show All 177 Lines • Show Last 20 Lines