linux-arch.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Linux-Arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Subject: Re: VERIFY_READ/WRITE in uaccess.h?
Date: Mon, 11 May 2015 23:26:49 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <55511E99.5070806@nod.at> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <55511989.2010407@zytor.com>

Am 11.05.2015 um 23:05 schrieb H. Peter Anvin:
> On 05/10/2015 02:44 AM, Richard Weinberger wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> While cleaning up UML's uaccess code I've noticed that not a single architecture
>> is using VERIFY_READ/WRITE in access_ok().
>> One exception is UML, it uses the access type in one check which is in vain anyways.
>> Also asm-generic/uaccess.h drops the type parameter silently.
>>
>> Why do we still carry it around?
>>
>> Is it because we want it for some future architecture which can benefit
>> from it or just because nobody cared enough to do a tree-wide cleanup?
>> I fear it is the latter... ;)
>>
> 
> Or, perhaps, nobody noticed?

Also possible.

While we are at it, access_ok() is IMHO a horrible name. Historic?
Today it is used to find out whether an address is in an
architecture defined range and therefore valid.
Maybe valid_address() would be a better name...

Thanks,
//richard

  reply	other threads:[~2015-05-11 21:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-05-10  9:44 VERIFY_READ/WRITE in uaccess.h? Richard Weinberger
2015-05-11 21:05 ` H. Peter Anvin
2015-05-11 21:26   ` Richard Weinberger [this message]
2015-05-11 21:42   ` Linus Torvalds
2015-05-12  5:47     ` H. Peter Anvin

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=55511E99.5070806@nod.at \
    --to=richard@nod.at \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).