Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 12 Mar 2002 10:23:56 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 12 Mar 2002 10:23:47 -0500 Received: from mailout06.sul.t-online.com ([194.25.134.19]:53400 "EHLO mailout06.sul.t-online.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 12 Mar 2002 10:23:36 -0500 Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 16:23:16 +0100 From: Andi Kleen To: Roman Zippel Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ak@muc.de Subject: Re: __get_user usage in mm/slab.c Message-ID: <20020312162316.A3505@averell> In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Mar 12, 2002 at 12:58:53PM +0100, Roman Zippel wrote: > Hi, > > The way __get_user is currently used in mm/slab.c is not portable. It > breaks on arch which have seperate user/kernel memory space. It still > works during boot or from kernel threads, but /proc/slabinfo shows only > broken entries or if a module creates a slab cache, I got lots of > warnings. > We have to at least insert a "set_fs(get_fs())", but IMO a separate > interface would be better. Any opinions? I agree that a separate interface would be better, one that guarantees to handle exceptions on the m68k and other archs with separate address spaces too. I use that facility quite regularly in architecture specific code, sorry for letting it slip into portable code. I guess set_fs(KERNEL_DS); __*_user() will not catch exceptions on m68k currently, right? -Andi - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/