From: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@redhat.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: David Smith <dsmith@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] x86: Verify access_ok() context
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 15:22:18 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170119202218.GB20931@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1701191910080.5358@nanos>
Hi, Thomas -
On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 07:12:48PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> [...]
> It does matter very much, because the fact that the warning triggers tells
> me that it's placed in code which is NOT executed in task context.
> [...]
> We are not papering over problems.
Understood. We were interpreting the comments around access_ok to
mean that the underlying hazard condition was different (stricter)
than in_task(). If the warning could be made to match that hazard
condition more precisely, then safe but non-in_task() callers can use
access_ok() without the warning.
- FChE
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-19 20:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-11-22 9:57 [RFC][PATCH] x86: Verify access_ok() context Peter Zijlstra
2016-11-22 17:28 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-11-22 19:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-11-22 19:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-12-05 10:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-01-16 20:27 ` David Smith
2017-01-16 21:14 ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-01-18 22:16 ` David Smith
2017-01-19 0:19 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-01-19 15:37 ` David Smith
2017-01-20 8:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-01-20 8:50 ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-01-19 18:12 ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-01-19 20:22 ` Frank Ch. Eigler [this message]
2017-01-19 20:50 ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-01-19 21:27 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2017-01-19 22:20 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-01-19 23:04 ` Thomas Gleixner
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=20170119202218.GB20931@redhat.com \
--to=fche@redhat.com \
--cc=dsmith@redhat.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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.