[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140117191714.GH24394@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2014 14:17:14 -0500
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
To: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kexec@...ts.infradead.org,
ebiederm@...ssion.com, hpa@...or.com, mjg59@...f.ucam.org,
greg@...ah.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] kexec: A new system call, kexec_file_load, for in
kernel kexec
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 09:42:52PM +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote:
[..]
> > @@ -843,7 +1075,11 @@ static int kimage_load_normal_segment(struct kimage *image,
> > PAGE_SIZE - (maddr & ~PAGE_MASK));
> > uchunk = min(ubytes, mchunk);
> >
> > - result = copy_from_user(ptr, buf, uchunk);
> > + /* For file based kexec, source pages are in kernel memory */
> > + if (image->file_mode)
> > + memcpy(ptr, buf, uchunk);
>
> Very minor nit I came across when going through the patchset -- can't we
> use some different buffer for the file-based kexec that's not marked
> __user here? This really causes some eye-pain when looking at the code.
Hi Jiri,
Sorry, responding to your comment after a very long time.
Now I have made buf field a union as it can either be a user pointer or
a kernel pointer depending on which kexec syscall has been used. Now
caller needs to either use segment->buf or segment->kbuf based on the
context of code.
kexec_segment {
union {
void __user *buf;
void *kbuf;
};
}
Thanks
Vivek
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists