[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20250902010115.e20bb3beb9341aa5cb651009@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2025 01:01:15 +0900
From: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@...nel.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, Luo Gengkun
<luogengkun@...weicloud.com>, mhiramat@...nel.org,
mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing: Fix tracing_marker may trigger page fault
during preempt_disable
On Fri, 29 Aug 2025 18:13:11 -0400
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Aug 2025 20:53:40 +0100
> Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com> wrote:
> valid user address.
> >
> > BTW, arm64 also bails out early in do_page_fault() if in_atomic() but I
> > suspect that's not the case here.
> >
> > Adding Al Viro since since he wrote a large part of uaccess.h.
> >
>
> So, __copy_from_user_inatomic() is supposed to be called if
> pagefault_disable() has already been called? If this is the case, can we
> add more comments to this code? I've been using the inatomic() version this
> way in preempt disabled locations since 2016.
Ah, OK. it is internal version... plz ignore my previous mail.
Thanks,
>
> Looks like it needs to be converted to copy_from_user_nofault().
>
> Luo, this version of the patch looks legit, no need for a v2.
>
> I just wanted to figure out why __copy_from_user_inatomic() wasn't atomic.
> If anything, it needs to be better documented.
>
> -- Steve
--
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists