From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs: use KERNEL_DS instead of get_ds()
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2019 08:20:17 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190308162017.GA26207@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190308142331.GE2217@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 02:23:31PM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> You do realize that nested pairs of that sort are not all there is?
> Even leaving m68k aside (there the same registers that select
> userland or kernel for that kind of access can be used e.g. for
> writeback control, or to switch to accessing sun3 MMU tables, etc.)
Yes. And the whole point is to keep these uses clear and separate.
> there are
> * temporary switches to USER_DS in things like unaligned
> access handlers, etc., where the kernel is doing emulation of possibly
> userland insns; similar for oops code dumping, etc.
> * use_mm()/unuse_mm() should probably switch to USER_DS and
> back, rather than doing that in callers.
> * switch to USER_DS (and no, it's *not* "USER_DS unless we started
> with KERNEL_DS" - nested counter is no-go here) for perf callbacks.
> * regular non-paired switches to USER_DS: do_exit() and
> flush_old_exec().
And that is probably the close to full list of callers that want
to explicitly enable access to the user address space, and thus
mark the thread as a user thread (and occasionally clear that in e.g.
unuse_mm).
Unless I'm completely missing something our general rule of thumb
should be:
- threads are started with uaccess kernel turned on (count = 1)
- if we execute in userspace we switch to user uaccess (count = 0)
- same for use_mm style threads that want user access
- every current random kernel code override increments the refcount
and drops the reference when done
- force uaccess cases like do_exit or the validation check on
return to userspace force it back to 0.
Initially each 1 > 0 transition (decrement or force) will do
set_fs(USER_DS), each 0 > 1 transition will do set_fs(KERNEL_DS).
Then later architectures can kill the set_fs API, and potentially
optimize things by getting rid of the addr_limit field in its current
form.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-03-08 16:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-03-01 20:08 [PATCH] fs: use KERNEL_DS instead of get_ds() Jann Horn
2019-03-02 3:40 ` Al Viro
2019-03-05 0:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2019-03-08 14:01 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-03-08 14:23 ` Al Viro
2019-03-08 16:20 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
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=20190308162017.GA26207@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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.