Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20191006222046.GA18027@roeck-us.net> <CAHk-=wgrqwuZJmwbrjhjCFeSUu2i57unaGOnP4qZAmSyuGwMZA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHk-=wjRPerXedTDoBbJL=tHBpH+=sP6pX_9NfgWxpnmHC5RtQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <5f06c138-d59a-d811-c886-9e73ce51924c@roeck-us.net> <CAHk-=whAQWEMADgxb_qAw=nEY4OnuDn6HU4UCSDMNT5ULKvg3g@mail.gmail.com>
 <20191007012437.GK26530@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <CAHk-=whKJfX579+2f-CHc4_YmEmwvMe_Csr0+CPfLAsSAdfDoA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20191007025046.GL26530@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <CAHk-=whraNSys_Lj=Ut1EA=CJEfw2Uothh+5-WL+7nDJBegWcQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHk-=witTXMGsc9ZAK4hnKnd_O7u8b1eiou-6cfjt4aOcWvruQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+8MBb+VKk0aQZaJ+tMbFV7+s37HrQ6pzy4sHDAA3yqS-3nVwA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHk-=wi3P2NvBNocyNFTAb-G08P0ASVihMVKmiw__oNU4V2M5g@mail.gmail.com> <CA+8MBb+Vubsx3Qyav25tgUgiGbs1XmEwoaCXTM=8jk4m2CxRbw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+8MBb+Vubsx3Qyav25tgUgiGbs1XmEwoaCXTM=8jk4m2CxRbw@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date:   Mon, 7 Oct 2019 13:04:34 -0700
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wjFQNxO+JgA808pCMO333N5PkxrwU4kCntiPxqZKuxgQA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Convert filldir[64]() from __put_user() to unsafe_put_user()
To:     Tony Luck <tony.luck@gmail.com>
Cc:     Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 12:49 PM Tony Luck <tony.luck@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> If PSR.ac is set, we trap. If it isn't set, then model specific
> (though all implementations will
> trap for an unaligned access that crosses a 4K boundary).

Ok. At that point, setting AC unconditionally is the better model just
to get test coverage for "it will trap occasionally anyway".

Odd "almost-but-not-quite x86" both in naming and in behavior (AC was
a no-op in kernel-mode until SMAP).

> Your patch does make all the messages go away.
>
> Tested-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>

Ok, I'll commit it, and we'll see what Al can come up with that might
be a bigger cleanup.

             Linus