lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Nov]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/4] inet: Add skb_copy_datagram_iter
From
From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2014 06:58:17 +0000

> On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 12:20:20AM -0500, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
>> Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2014 21:19:08 +0000
>>
>> > 1) does sparc64 access_ok() need to differ for 32bit and 64bit tasks?
>>
>> sparc64 will just fault no matter what kind of task it is.
>>
>> It is impossible for a user task to generate a reference to
>> a kernel virtual address, as kernel and user accesses each
>> go via a separate address space identifier.
>
> Sure, but why do we have access_ok() there at all? I.e. why not just have
> it constant 1?

Since access_ok() is in fact constant 1 on sparc64, where we use it,
does it really matter?


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-11-10 09:01    [W:0.090 / U:0.976 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site