[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200513194003.GA31028@lst.de>
Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 21:40:03 +0200
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-um <linux-um@...ts.infradead.org>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/18] maccess: allow architectures to provide kernel
probing directly
On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 12:36:18PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > + arch_kernel_read(dst, src, type, err_label); \
>
> I'm wondering if
>
> (a) we shouldn't expose this as an interface in general
We do export something like it, currently it is called
probe_kernel_address, and the last patch renames it to
get_kernel_nofault. However it is implemented as a wrapper
around probe_kernel_address / copy_from_kernel_nofault and thus
not quite as efficient and without the magic goto semantics.
> (b) it wouldn't be named differently..
It probably should with all the renaming..
Powered by blists - more mailing lists