All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@linux.intel.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: x86, x32: Correct invalid use of user timespec in the kernel
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2014 11:00:15 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <52EBF2BF.2090807@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFwcgGPb=5cTnkKpP4vH2kqCCvxGteZT58efHhg3aJjcfQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 01/31/2014 10:45 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 10:06 AM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>
>> My feeling is that {get,put}_compat_timespec() should at the very least
>> have leading underscores to flag it as a low-level function, but better
>> suggestions would be appreciated.
> 
> Why not just remove it entirely, and change all users to
> compat_[get|set]_timespec (same for timeval etc, of course).
> 
> After all, compat_*_time*() does fall back cleanly for non-x32 cases.
> And sure, maybe that particular code is never *needed* for x32
> support, but the overhead is generally zero (since in most cases X32
> isn't even configured), or very low anyway. So the upside of having
> two subtly incompatible interfaces is very dubious, no?
> 

As they both seem to be out of line, I would think so.  More than half
of the use cases are in kernel/compat.c where we could use a
double-underscore inline version if we really care -- it would probably
be a net win in terms of performance.

There are only 25 call sites in the kernel of
'(get|put)_compat_time(val|spec)' and that includes the ones inside the
larger functions.

	-hpa


  reply	other threads:[~2014-01-31 19:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20140131025453.B594B660CA3@gitolite.kernel.org>
2014-01-31 17:50 ` x86, x32: Correct invalid use of user timespec in the kernel Dave Jones
2014-01-31 18:06   ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-01-31 18:45     ` Linus Torvalds
2014-01-31 19:00       ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2014-01-31 19:13       ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-01-31 22:37       ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-02-01 19:07         ` Linus Torvalds

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=52EBF2BF.2090807@linux.intel.com \
    --to=hpa@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=davej@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --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.