lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Nov]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/4] inet: Add skb_copy_datagram_iter
    From
    From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
    Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2014 06:58:17 +0000

    > On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 12:20:20AM -0500, David Miller wrote:
    >> From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
    >> Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2014 21:19:08 +0000
    >>
    >> > 1) does sparc64 access_ok() need to differ for 32bit and 64bit tasks?
    >>
    >> sparc64 will just fault no matter what kind of task it is.
    >>
    >> It is impossible for a user task to generate a reference to
    >> a kernel virtual address, as kernel and user accesses each
    >> go via a separate address space identifier.
    >
    > Sure, but why do we have access_ok() there at all? I.e. why not just have
    > it constant 1?

    Since access_ok() is in fact constant 1 on sparc64, where we use it,
    does it really matter?


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2014-11-10 09:01    [W:4.228 / U:0.116 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site