[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALCETrXp5at9nQgz0x9TZOpajDGfbMhQXM-igBFjrQGJ_w_Wsg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 13:14:06 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
To: "Bae, Chang Seok" <chang.seok.bae@...el.com>
Cc: Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"Metzger, Markus T" <markus.t.metzger@...el.com>,
"Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 01/15] x86/fsgsbase/64: Introduce FS/GS base helper functions
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 10:58 AM Chang S. Bae <chang.seok.bae@...el.com> wrote:
>
> With new helpers, FS/GS base access is centralized.
> Eventually, when FSGSBASE instruction enabled, it will
> be faster.
>
> The helpers are used on ptrace APIs (PTRACE_ARCH_PRCTL,
> PTRACE_SETREG, PTRACE_GETREG, etc). Idea is to keep
> the FS/GS-update mechanism organized.
>
> Notion of "active" and "inactive" are used to distinguish
> GS bases between "kernel" and "user". "inactive" GS base
> is the GS base, backed up at kernel entries, of inactive
> (user) task's.
I'm fine with the code, but the changelog entry is confusing. A bunch
of the active helpers don't contain the term "active".
> +/*
> + * Read/write an (inactive) task's fsbase or gsbase. This returns
> + * the value that the FS/GS base would have (if the task were to be
> + * resumed). The current task is also supported.
> + */
Please change to "Read/write a task's fsbase or gsbase. ... These work
on current or on a different non-running task."
> +
> +unsigned long read_task_fsbase(struct task_struct *task)
> +{
> + unsigned long fsbase;
> +
> + if (task == current)
> + fsbase = read_fsbase();
> + else
> + /*
> + * XXX: This will not behave as expected if called
> + * if fsindex != 0
> + */
> + fsbase = task->thread.fsbase;
> +
Please put braces around the if and else blocks whenever either of
them spans multiple lines. Also, maybe change add a note to the
comment and/or the changelog that this is preserving an existing bug
and that it's fixed later in the series.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists