[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2017 23:25:16 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
Andy Lutomirsky <luto@...nel.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bpetkov@...e.de>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...gle.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>,
Eduardo Valentin <eduval@...zon.com>,
"Liguori, Anthony" <aliguori@...zon.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 13/16] x86/ldt: Introduce LDT write fault handler
On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 10:41:03PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Now that made me go back to the state of the patch series which made us
> make that magic 'touch' and write fault handler. The difference to the code
> today is that it did not prepopulate the user visible mapping.
>
> We added that later because we were worried about not being able to
> populate it in the #PF due to memory pressure without ripping out the magic
> cure again.
>
> But I did now and actually removing both the user exit magic 'touch' code
> and the write fault handler keeps it working.
Argh, had we really not tried that!? Bah.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists