From: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
To: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Cc: Ian Molton <spyro@f2s.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: A question about PROT_NONE on ARM and ARM26
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 02:50:47 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040701015047.GA1094@mail.shareable.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406302100260.1713-100000@xanadu.home>
Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > cmp r0, #(TASK_SIZE - (1<<24))
> >
> > I.e. just compare against the largest constant that can be
> > represented. For accesses to the last part of userspace, it's a
> > penalty of 4 instructions -- but it might work out to be a net gain.
>
> Maybe not. The user stack is located at the top so any user buffer
> allocated on the stack would be penalized.
I agree. I don't know if it would work out to be a net gain on
average or a net loss.
It saves a couple of instructions, but when it fails the cost is only
a few instructions anyway.
Probably for get_user & put_user, the common case _is_ to be on the
user's stack, so Russell's code would be better.
-- Jamie
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-07-01 1:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-06-30 2:44 A question about PROT_NONE on ARM and ARM26 Jamie Lokier
2004-06-30 3:38 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-07-01 3:26 ` Testing PROT_NONE and other protections, and a surprise Jamie Lokier
2004-07-01 3:35 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-07-01 4:01 ` Jamie Lokier
2004-07-01 3:44 ` Kyle Moffett
2004-07-01 4:11 ` Jamie Lokier
2004-07-01 4:59 ` Kyle Moffett
2004-07-01 12:39 ` Jamie Lokier
2004-07-01 14:43 ` [OT] " Kyle Moffett
2004-07-01 14:50 ` Jamie Lokier
2004-07-01 15:01 ` Kyle Moffett
2004-07-01 16:37 ` Matt Mackall
2004-07-01 17:26 ` Michael Driscoll
2004-07-02 7:37 ` Gabriel Paubert
2004-07-01 12:52 ` Russell King
2004-07-01 14:26 ` Richard Curnow
2004-06-30 8:16 ` A question about PROT_NONE on ARM and ARM26 Russell King
2004-06-30 14:59 ` Jamie Lokier
2004-06-30 15:22 ` Ian Molton
2004-06-30 18:26 ` Russell King
2004-06-30 19:14 ` Jamie Lokier
2004-06-30 19:23 ` Russell King
2004-06-30 20:15 ` Jamie Lokier
2004-06-30 22:59 ` Russell King
2004-06-30 23:30 ` Jamie Lokier
2004-06-30 23:48 ` Ian Molton
2004-07-01 1:59 ` Jamie Lokier
2004-07-01 1:05 ` Nicolas Pitre
2004-07-01 1:50 ` Jamie Lokier [this message]
2004-07-02 18:39 ` Russell King
2004-07-01 15:27 ` Scott Wood
2004-07-01 23:53 ` Jamie Lokier
2004-07-02 14:36 ` Scott Wood
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=20040701015047.GA1094@mail.shareable.org \
--to=jamie@shareable.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nico@cam.org \
--cc=spyro@f2s.com \
/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.