[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8ad8bb83b7034f7e92df12040fb8c2c2@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date: Thu, 9 May 2019 13:46:59 +0000
From: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To: 'Michal Suchánek' <msuchanek@...e.de>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
CC: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
"linux-s390@...r.kernel.org" <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...abs.org>,
"Andy Shevchenko" <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
"linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
"Martin Schwidefsky" <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
"Tobin C . Harding" <me@...in.cc>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] vsprintf: Do not break early boot with probing addresses
From: Michal Suchánek
> Sent: 09 May 2019 14:38
...
> > The problem is the combination of some new code called via printk(),
> > check_pointer() which calls probe_kernel_read(). That then calls
> > allow_user_access() (PPC_KUAP) and that uses mmu_has_feature() too early
> > (before we've patched features).
>
> There is early_mmu_has_feature for this case. mmu_has_feature does not
> work before patching so parts of kernel that can run before patching
> must use the early_ variant which actually runs code reading the
> feature bitmap to determine the answer.
Does the early_ variant get patched so the it is reasonably
efficient after the 'patching' is done?
Or should there be a third version which gets patched across?
David
-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists