[lkml]   [2018]   [Jul]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH for 4.18 2/6] rseq: use get_user/put_user rather than __get_user/__put_user
Mathieu Desnoyers <> writes:
> ----- On Jul 8, 2018, at 5:03 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>> In preparation to use __u64 for the rseq_cs pointer field, 32-bit
>> architectures need to read this 64-bit value located in user-space
>> addresses.
>> __get_user is used to read this value, given that its access check has
>> already been performed with access_ok() on rseq registration.
>> arm does not implement 8-byte __get_user. Rather than trying to
>> improve __get_user on ARM, use get_user/put_user across rseq instead.
>> If those end up showing up in benchmarks, the proper approach would be to
>> use user_access_begin() / unsafe_get/put_user() / user_access_end()
>> anyway.
> So, another twist to this story: ppc32 does not implement u64 get_user().

Or __get_user() for that matter.

But we should just fix it.

We have the asm to do it, it's just the fact that __gu_val is unsigned
long causes the size > sizeof(x) check here to fail:

#define __get_user_size(x, ptr, size, retval) \
do { \
retval = 0; \
__chk_user_ptr(ptr); \
if (size > sizeof(x)) \
(x) = __get_user_bad(); \

We seem to be able to fix that with the __inttype() trick that x86 uses.

That's probably not 4.18 material though. But if you want to go with
copy_from_user() for now you could then switch to get_user() for 4.19.


 \ /
  Last update: 2018-07-10 08:16    [W:0.133 / U:0.324 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site