From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Al Viro Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2022 01:50:36 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/18] clean up asm/uaccess.h, kill set_fs for good Message-Id: List-Id: References: <20220216131332.1489939-1-arnd@kernel.org> <00496df2-f9f2-2547-3ca3-7989e4713d6b@csgroup.eu> In-Reply-To: <00496df2-f9f2-2547-3ca3-7989e4713d6b@csgroup.eu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Christophe Leroy Cc: Arnd Bergmann , Linus Torvalds , Christoph Hellwig , "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "linux-api@vger.kernel.org" , "arnd@arndb.de" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "mark.rutland@arm.com" , "dalias@libc.org" , "linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-sh@vger.kernel.org" , "peterz@infradead.org" , "jcmvbkbc@gmail.com" , "guoren@kernel.org" , "sparclinux@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org" , "will@kernel.org" , "ardb@kernel.org" , "linux-s390@vger.kernel.org" , "bcain@codeaurora.org" , "deller@gmx.de" , "x86@kernel.org" , "linux@armlinux.org.uk" , "linux-csky@vger.kernel.org" , "mingo@redhat.com" , "geert@linux-m68k.org" , "linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org" , "hca@linux.ibm.com" , "linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-um@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org" , "openrisc@lists.librecores.org" , "green.hu@gmail.com" , "shorne@gmail.com" , "monstr@monstr.eu" , "tsbogend@alpha.franken.de" , "linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org" , "nickhu@andestech.com" , "linux-mips@vger.kernel.org" , "dinguyen@kernel.org" , "ebiederm@xmission.com" , "richard@nod.at" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , "linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" , "davem@davemloft.net" On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 07:20:11AM +0000, Christophe Leroy wrote: > And we have also > user_access_begin()/user_read_access_begin()/user_write_access_begin() > which call access_ok() then do the real work. Could be made generic with > call to some arch specific __user_access_begin() and friends after the > access_ok() and eventually the might_fault(). Not a good idea, considering the fact that we do not want to invite uses of "faster" variants...