PATCH: Add x32 arch_prctl support

[H. Peter Anvin]

I need more context...

"H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Roland McGrath <roland@hack.frob.com>
>wrote:
>>> The goes back to user uint32_t vs kernel uint64_t:
>>>
>>> http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2012-05/msg01519.html
>>>
>>> The difference is movq vs movl. Â There is no need for movq
>>> since x32 will only pass unsigned 32-bit value to kernel.
>>
>> I see. Â That one byte in a rarely-used call is not reason enough to
>> make the code uglier.
>
>Also since all inlined arguments will be casted to "long int",
>using unsigned long long int or uint64_t is quite strange.
>
>>> Thanks. Â But since x32 kernel takes PTRACE_ARCH_PRCTL, I
>>> still need x32 ptrace to either handle it properly or set EINVAL
>>> when PTRACE_ARCH_PRCTL is passed.
>>
>> It was my proposal that the kernel be changed to refuse
>PTRACE_ARCH_PRCTL
>> in a ptrace call made from an x32 task.
>>
>
>Adding Peter.  The x32 PTRACE_ARCH_PRCTL change is in kernel 3.4.
>Peter, how hard to remove it from kernel?
>
>-- 
>H.J.

-- 
Sent from my mobile phone. Please excuse brevity and lack of formatting.