Re: [PATCH RFC v2 1/2] m68k: Handle __generic_copy_to_user faults more carefully

[Michael Schmitz <schmitzmic@gmail.com>]

Hi Finn,

thanks - tests (including __clear_user) with my 030 did show one Oops in 
the same place that __generic_copy_to_user did last fault, that is, the 
btst after the movesl instruction. Adding that instruction to the 
exception table avoids the Oops.

A range of path lengths as well as offsets tested. Still some tests 
pending... Couldn't find any evidence that a NOP is needed either.

I'll post the final version as soon as I've completed testing.

Cheers,

	Michael


Am 27.04.2024 um 13:44 schrieb Finn Thain:
>
> On Fri, 26 Apr 2024, I wrote:
>
>> I will test it tomorrow. I expect that a NOP is needed at the end of
>> __clear_user.
>>
>
> Everything seems to work now.
>
> I tested this series together with my own RFC patch on a Quadra (68040)
> and IIci (68030). My tests covered getcwd and llseek syscalls. I tried a
> build with the extra call to __clear_user() and a build without it. And I
> covered a range of working directory names.
>
> Tested-by: Finn Thain <fthain@linux-m68k.org>
>
> So apparently there'e no need for a NOP at the end of __clear_user() -- on
> '040 and '030 at least.
>