lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Sep]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH RESEND v3 6/6] powerpc/signal: Use unsafe_copy_siginfo_to_user()
From
Date


Le 13/09/2021 à 17:57, Eric W. Biederman a écrit :
> Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu> writes:
>
>> Use unsafe_copy_siginfo_to_user() in order to do the copy
>> within the user access block.
>>
>> On an mpc 8321 (book3s/32) the improvment is about 5% on a process
>> sending a signal to itself.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
>> ---
>> v3: Don't leave compat aside, use the new unsafe_copy_siginfo_to_user32()
>> ---
>> arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c | 8 +++-----
>> arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_64.c | 5 +----
>> 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c
>> index ff101e2b3bab..3a2db8af2d65 100644
>> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c
>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c
>> @@ -710,9 +710,9 @@ static long restore_tm_user_regs(struct pt_regs *regs, struct mcontext __user *s
>> }
>> #endif
>>
>> -#ifdef CONFIG_PPC64
>> +#ifndef CONFIG_PPC64
>>
>> -#define copy_siginfo_to_user copy_siginfo_to_user32
>> +#define unsafe_copy_siginfo_to_user32 unsafe_copy_siginfo_to_user
>>
>> #endif /* CONFIG_PPC64 */
>
> Any particular reason to reverse the sense of this #ifdef?

Yes I had double definition of unsafe_copy_siginfo_to_user(), I could
have ifdefed out unsafe_copy_siginfo_to_user() in signal.h, but I
prefered to ifdef out copy_siginfo_to_user32() in compat.h

>
> Otherwise this change looks much cleaner.

Thanks
Christophe

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-09-13 19:16    [W:0.052 / U:0.168 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site