Re: [PATCHv4 12/17] arm64: uaccess: split user/kernel routines
flat view
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Date: 2020-12-01 11:04:50
On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 06:42:24PM +0000, James Morse wrote:
Hi Mark,
Hi James, Thanks for the comments. I've applied most of those below, but I have one follow-up question.
On 13/11/2020 12:49, Mark Rutland wrote:quoted
+#define __get_mem_asm(ldr, reg, x, addr, err) \('ldr' as variable name where you need to output something other than ldr does my head in)quoted
asm volatile( \ - "1:"ALTERNATIVE(instr " " reg "1, [%2]\n", \ - alt_instr " " reg "1, [%2]\n", feature) \ + "1: " ldr " " reg "1, [%2]\n" \
I've changed this to 'load', and used 'store' in __put_mem_asm(). [...]
quoted
+#define __get_kernel_nofault(dst, src, type, err_label) \ +do { \ + int __gkn_err = 0; \ + \ + __raw_get_mem("ldr", *((type *)(dst)), \ + (__force type __user *)(src), __gkn_err); \Is the __user needed as you moved __chk_user_ptr() out of __raw_get_mem() in the previous patch?
You're right; the __user portion can go as neither __raw_get_mem() or __get_mem_asm() needs that. Likewise for __put_kernel_nofault(), __raw_put_mem(), and __put_mem_asm(). I've removed those.
(your branch on kernel.org does something different here, not sure if its ahead or behind v4)
AFAICT this portion of the patch is up-to-date with what's on kernel.org. I might have pushed that out-of-order with posting the series -- does this look the same now, or am I missing something?
quoted
+ if (unlikely(__gkn_err)) \ + goto err_label; \ +} while(0)
I'll fix the whitespace for the while(0), too... Thanks, Mark. _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel