[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1417108217-42687-1-git-send-email-dahi@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 18:10:15 +0100
From: David Hildenbrand <dahi@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: benh@...nel.crashing.org, paulus@...ba.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, heiko.carstens@...ibm.com,
dahi@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, schwidefsky@...ibm.com,
borntraeger@...ibm.com, mst@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
David.Laight@...LAB.COM
Subject: [PATCH RFC 0/2] Reenable might_sleep() checks for might_fault() when atomic
Simple prototype to enable might_sleep() checks in might_fault(), avoiding false
positives for scenarios involving explicit pagefault_disable().
So this should work:
spin_lock(&lock); /* also if left away */
pagefault_disable()
rc = copy_to_user(...)
pagefault_enable();
spin_unlock(&lock); /*
And this should report a warning again:
spin_lock(&lock);
rc = copy_to_user(...);
spin_unlock(&lock);
Still missing:
- Split of preempt documentation update + preempt_active define reshuffle
- Debug version to test for over/underflows
- Change documentation of user access methods to reflect the real behavior
- Don't touch the preempt counter, only the pagefault disable counter (future
work)
David Hildenbrand (2):
preempt: track pagefault_disable() calls in the preempt counter
mm, sched: trigger might_sleep() in might_fault() when pagefaults are
disabled
include/linux/kernel.h | 9 +++++++--
include/linux/preempt_mask.h | 24 +++++++++++++++++++-----
include/linux/uaccess.h | 21 ++++++++++++++-------
mm/memory.c | 15 ++++-----------
4 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
--
1.8.5.5
--
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