[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20190318155141.280380020@infradead.org>
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 16:38:55 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, tglx@...utronix.de, hpa@...or.com,
julien.thierry@....com, will.deacon@....com, luto@...capital.net,
mingo@...nel.org, catalin.marinas@....com, james.morse@....com,
valentin.schneider@....com, brgerst@...il.com, jpoimboe@...hat.com,
luto@...nel.org, bp@...en8.de, dvlasenk@...hat.com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
dvyukov@...gle.com, rostedt@...dmis.org
Subject: [PATCH 15/25] x86/uaccess,ftrace: Fix ftrace_likely_update() vs SMAP
For CONFIG_TRACE_BRANCH_PROFILING the likely/unlikely things get
overloaded and generate callouts to this code, and thus also when
AC=1.
Make it safe.
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
---
kernel/trace/trace_branch.c | 4 ++++
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
--- a/kernel/trace/trace_branch.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/trace_branch.c
@@ -205,6 +205,8 @@ void trace_likely_condition(struct ftrac
void ftrace_likely_update(struct ftrace_likely_data *f, int val,
int expect, int is_constant)
{
+ unsigned long flags = user_access_save();
+
/* A constant is always correct */
if (is_constant) {
f->constant++;
@@ -223,6 +225,8 @@ void ftrace_likely_update(struct ftrace_
f->data.correct++;
else
f->data.incorrect++;
+
+ user_access_restore(flags);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(ftrace_likely_update);
Powered by blists - more mailing lists