Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934431AbZKYLtY (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Nov 2009 06:49:24 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S934212AbZKYLtY (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Nov 2009 06:49:24 -0500 Received: from mail2.shareable.org ([80.68.89.115]:56710 "EHLO mail2.shareable.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934143AbZKYLtX (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Nov 2009 06:49:23 -0500 Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 11:49:08 +0000 From: Jamie Lokier To: Jie Zhang Cc: uClinux development list , David Howells , David McCullough , Greg Ungerer , Paul Mundt , uclinux-dist-devel@blackfin.uclinux.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [uClinux-dev] [PATCH] NOMMU: use copy_*_user_page() in access_process_vm() Message-ID: <20091125114908.GA21778@shareable.org> References: <1259128503-28276-1-git-send-email-vapier@gentoo.org> <20091125061640.GB17203@shareable.org> <4B0CCE4A.5000602@analog.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4B0CCE4A.5000602@analog.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3251 Lines: 69 Jie Zhang wrote: > On 11/25/2009 02:16 PM, Jamie Lokier wrote: > >Mike Frysinger wrote: > >>From: Jie Zhang > >> > >>The mmu code uses the copy_*_user_page() variants in access_process_vm() > >>rather than copy_*_user() as the former includes an icache flush. This is > >>important when doing things like setting software breakpoints with gdb. > >>So switch the nommu code over to do the same. > > > >Reasonable, but it's a bit subtle don't you think? > >How about a one-line comment saying why it's using copy_*_user_page()? > > > >(If it was called copy_*_user_flush_icache() I wouldn't say anything, > >but it isn't). > > > But I think it's well known in Linux kernel developers that > copy_to_user_page and copy_from_user_page should do cache flushing. It's > documented in Documentation/cachetlb.txt. I don't think it's necessary > to replicate it here. You're right, however I now think the commit message is misleading. Since this is the *only place in the entire kernel* where these functions are used (plus the mmu equivalent), I'm not sure I'd agree about well known, and the name could be better (copy_*_user_ptrace()), but I agree now, it doesn't need a comment. It was the talk of icache flush which bothered me, as I (wrongly) assumed copy_*_user_page() was used elsewhere, without knowledge of icache vs non-icache differences - which are often the responsibility of userspace to get right, so often the kernel does not care. In fact, it's not just icache. copy_*_user_page() has to do some *data* cache flushing too, on some architecures. For example, see arch/sparc/include/asm/cacheflush_64.h: #define copy_to_user_page(vma, page, vaddr, dst, src, len) \ do { \ flush_cache_page(vma, vaddr, page_to_pfn(page)); \ memcpy(dst, src, len); \ flush_ptrace_access(vma, page, vaddr, src, len, 0); \ } while (0) #define copy_from_user_page(vma, page, vaddr, dst, src, len) \ do { \ flush_cache_page(vma, vaddr, page_to_pfn(page)); \ memcpy(dst, src, len); \ flush_ptrace_access(vma, page, vaddr, dst, len, 1); \ } while (0) I'm not sure why I don't see the same dcache flushing on ARM, so I wonder if the ARM implementation of these buggy. Anyway, that means the commit message is a little misleading, saying it's for the icache flush. It is for whatever icache and dcache flushes are needed for a ptrace access. Which is why, given they are only used for ptrace (have just grepped), I'm inclined to think it'd be clearer to rename the functions to copy_*_user_ptrace(). And make your no-mmu change of course :-) Any thoughts on the rename? -- Jamie -- 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/