Received: by 2002:a25:1985:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 127csp459163ybz; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 12:23:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypIcQmo4UEIZaYf1j+VIRIeDrlaaQCe4VwJ/DWM/bJNYFexgU8joxVZyXpHdteruKTJ4W6VK X-Received: by 2002:a50:d942:: with SMTP id u2mr20629764edj.116.1587497028826; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 12:23:48 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1587497028; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=BiTWNkTS1x+kzp/5OZ9EO7KO54WGVtsg9IcjJymUxdUqhiJMwsy+fn6DN+N0/8Wig6 cyh3cl+EjkXmeDtMWWrcEys97hTLJHYs8JaqvhECQTAiIaEo3RkHganzJABxqxMDDB1G eaRJZZPx1sT+3d6kzu7DoQmaMCNroxwbimvBRsUCDqZf91kRfDB3kKO5ZACSnKOYmxL2 OdR587M5z49wq9spvm7eEoVjM40SIaD4A3HFiGJib6fSCHOdPqdmnexuF0N6AUCzWVOb OfkCO28NNSmUnlThN2UsjmNJ8p042FwJp6E6wRpe6LLPgi/gxHVvwT3QJM8KmXJoo7Lu HjFw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:in-reply-to:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=eoPNDLgqZg1pAesKYXCVctARBxc7fxijBPfEm+URujQ=; b=Qlq8PRLEzQXhUnP7jdJZbj3qS8vrJSPfs3IP8irqz+Uj/K/l8r76ajj/+WREzhz+IK VasQ+qrPZ8TaSrSH+1s8/oWXrSc5W1nNhB4OFw+6EjX/g/SjDirK4fWyo2oT0eZi+t+L RohSLfaUmQXD9xSF2KnOy6EI+QNYVh3MiCrlwL0eG33Up9R6cfaJ9b6/SAb77o6ypIjg /wLjh0pJCt9bQ4MobxeqpmxJE5boaJhFbo5szHafll048weOv8UO1abozbVGPsC73U8a N6fTO/R7Mnpkd77LA62Lbv+zVfdRvkMSNXgdBh4Pw7h+NFHWiF8+Ti29izncGwg7BQfI YEHA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id r15si2023583edx.362.2020.04.21.12.23.24; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 12:23:48 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726389AbgDUTTX (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 21 Apr 2020 15:19:23 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:37178 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725987AbgDUTTX (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Apr 2020 15:19:23 -0400 Received: from ZenIV.linux.org.uk (zeniv.linux.org.uk [IPv6:2002:c35c:fd02::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D0F71C0610D5; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 12:19:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from viro by ZenIV.linux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jQyQH-007mMD-Un; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 19:19:10 +0000 Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 20:19:09 +0100 From: Al Viro To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Andrew Morton , Jeremy Kerr , Arnd Bergmann , "Eric W . Biederman" , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] powerpc/spufs: simplify spufs core dumping Message-ID: <20200421191909.GF23230@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20200421154204.252921-1-hch@lst.de> <20200421154204.252921-2-hch@lst.de> <20200421184941.GD23230@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20200421190148.GA26071@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200421190148.GA26071@lst.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 09:01:48PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 07:49:41PM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > > > spin_lock(&ctx->csa.register_lock); > > > - ret = __spufs_proxydma_info_read(ctx, buf, len, pos); > > > + __spufs_proxydma_info_read(ctx, &info); > > > + ret = simple_read_from_buffer(buf, len, pos, &info, sizeof(info)); > > > > IDGI... What's that access_ok() for? If you are using simple_read_from_buffer(), > > the damn thing goes through copy_to_user(). Why bother with separate access_ok() > > here? > > I have no idea at all, this just refactors the code. Wait a bloody minute, it's doing *what* under a spinlock?