From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Richard Kuo Subject: Re: [patch v3 30/36] Hexagon: Add page-fault support. Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2011 20:34:29 -0500 Message-ID: <20110913013429.GE6925@codeaurora.org> References: <20110909010847.294039464@codeaurora.org> <20110909010917.578513171@codeaurora.org> <1315753729.455.56.camel@pasglop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1315753729.455.56.camel@pasglop> Sender: linux-hexagon-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linas Vepstas , Arnd Bergmann List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 12:08:49PM -0300, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > Are you sure about enabling interrupts before going to "no_context" ? > > If somebody does a user access "in atomic" with interrupt disabled (with > the expectation that a fault would be caught by search_exception_tables > and returned as -EFAULT), such code probably doesn't expect interrupts > to be re-enabled implicitely. I hadn't considered that... I'll review this and make sure this isn't what we intended (it probably isn't) and get it fixed. Thanks, Richard Kuo -- Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from wolverine01.qualcomm.com ([199.106.114.254]:3206 "EHLO wolverine01.qualcomm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753154Ab1IMBeb (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Sep 2011 21:34:31 -0400 Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2011 20:34:29 -0500 From: Richard Kuo Subject: Re: [patch v3 30/36] Hexagon: Add page-fault support. Message-ID: <20110913013429.GE6925@codeaurora.org> References: <20110909010847.294039464@codeaurora.org> <20110909010917.578513171@codeaurora.org> <1315753729.455.56.camel@pasglop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1315753729.455.56.camel@pasglop> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linas Vepstas , Arnd Bergmann Message-ID: <20110913013429.E0OJuqnhjmlVNoUnUdOTrYKNXGEMCsjmzxjxV2SgX1Q@z> On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 12:08:49PM -0300, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > Are you sure about enabling interrupts before going to "no_context" ? > > If somebody does a user access "in atomic" with interrupt disabled (with > the expectation that a fault would be caught by search_exception_tables > and returned as -EFAULT), such code probably doesn't expect interrupts > to be re-enabled implicitely. I hadn't considered that... I'll review this and make sure this isn't what we intended (it probably isn't) and get it fixed. Thanks, Richard Kuo -- Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.