linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Christophe LEROY <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>, Scott Wood <oss@buserror.net>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] powerpc/mm: split store_updates_sp() in two parts in do_page_fault()
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2017 22:11:13 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1496405473.2842.9.camel@kernel.crashing.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6daf8f4e-9b39-d585-2c64-9b0348fef123@c-s.fr>

On Fri, 2017-06-02 at 11:39 +0200, Christophe LEROY wrote:
> The difference between get_user() and __get_user() is that get_user() 
> performs an access_ok() in addition.
> 
> Doesn't access_ok() only checks whether addr is below TASK_SIZE to 
> ensure it is a valid user address ?

Do you have a measurable improvement by skipping that check ? I agree
with your reasoning but I'm also paranoid and so I wouldn't change it
unless it's really worth it.

Cheers,
Ben.

  reply	other threads:[~2017-06-02 12:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-04-19 12:56 [PATCH 0/5] powerpc/mm: some cleanup of do_page_fault() Christophe Leroy
2017-04-19 12:56 ` [PATCH 1/5] powerpc/mm: only call store_updates_sp() on stores in do_page_fault() Christophe Leroy
2017-04-24  9:10   ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-06-05 10:21   ` [1/5] " Michael Ellerman
2017-04-19 12:56 ` [PATCH 2/5] powerpc/mm: split store_updates_sp() in two parts " Christophe Leroy
2017-04-24  9:11   ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-06-02  9:26   ` Michael Ellerman
2017-06-02  9:39     ` Christophe LEROY
2017-06-02 12:11       ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt [this message]
2017-06-02 12:31         ` Christophe LEROY
2017-06-05 10:49           ` Michael Ellerman
2017-06-05 10:45       ` Michael Ellerman
2017-06-05 17:48         ` christophe leroy
2017-06-06 11:00           ` Michael Ellerman
2017-06-06 13:29             ` Christophe LEROY
2017-04-19 12:56 ` [PATCH 3/5] powerpc/mm: remove a redundant test " Christophe Leroy
2017-04-19 12:56 ` [PATCH 4/5] powerpc/mm: Evaluate user_mode(regs) only once " Christophe Leroy
2017-04-24  9:13   ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-04-19 12:56 ` [PATCH 5/5] powerpc/mm: The 8xx doesn't call do_page_fault() for breakpoints Christophe Leroy

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=1496405473.2842.9.camel@kernel.crashing.org \
    --to=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=christophe.leroy@c-s.fr \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=oss@buserror.net \
    --cc=paulus@samba.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).