lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Apr]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: kgdb: fix optional arch functions and probe_kernel_*

* Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:

> On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 17:42:54 GMT
> Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org> wrote:
>
> > --- a/mm/maccess.c
> > +++ b/mm/maccess.c
> > @@ -17,11 +17,14 @@
> > long probe_kernel_read(void *dst, void *src, size_t size)
> > {
> > long ret;
> > + mm_segment_t old_fs = get_fs();
> >
> > + set_fs(KERNEL_DS);
> > pagefault_disable();
> > ret = __copy_from_user_inatomic(dst,
> > (__force const void __user *)src, size);
> > pagefault_enable();
> > + set_fs(old_fs);
> >
> > return ret ? -EFAULT : 0;
> > }
>
> Oh. Well that rather invalidates my earlier comments. It looks like
> this change could have been folded, but I understand that this
> sometimes gets wearisome and isn't terribly important if
>
> a) the fix doesn't repair build breakage and
>
> b) the fix doesn't fix runtime breakage and
>
> c) the fix fixes code which the git-bisect user won't have enabled in
> config anyway.

yeah. I mentioned it in the pull request that i kept the fixes apart to
demonstrate the overall fix dynamics of the KGDB tree over a full kernel
cycle. I normally backmerge and create a clean queue - but that creates
a false perception that the tree is 'too fresh' and trust is harder to
be expressed.

> Still. Do we need the set_fs() in there? __copy_from_user_inatomic()
> is a "__" uaccess function and hence shouldn't be running access_ok()?

yeah, i guess that's true. Jason?

Ingo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-04-21 16:03    [W:0.118 / U:0.064 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site