Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Thu, 11 Aug 2022 16:27:53 +0200 | From | Borislav Petkov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH Part2 v6 09/49] x86/fault: Add support to handle the RMP fault for user address |
| |
On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 10:00:57PM +0000, Kalra, Ashish wrote: > This is more like a sanity check and returning 1 will cause the fault > handler to return and ignore the fault for current #PF case. If the > page got unmapped, the fault will not happen again and there will be > no retry, so the fault in this case is being ignored.
I know what will happen. I'm asking you to make this explicit in the code because this separate define documents the situation.
One more return type != 0 won't hurt.
> Ok, so you are suggesting that we remove this check and simply keep > this function wrapping around __split_huge_pmd(). This becomes a > generic utility function.
Yes, it is in generic code so it better be generic function. That's why I'm questioning the vendor-specific check there.
-- Regards/Gruss, Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
|  |