Re: [PATCH v4 01/17] x86/mpx: Do not use SIB index if index points to R/ESP

2017-02-23 Thread Ricardo Neri
On Thu, 2017-02-23 at 18:33 -0800, Joe Perches wrote: > On Thu, 2017-02-23 at 14:17 -0800, Ricardo Neri wrote: > > On Thu, 2017-02-23 at 08:24 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 10:36:50PM -0800, Ricardo Neri wrote: > > > > + /* > > > > +

Re: [PATCH v4 01/17] x86/mpx: Do not use SIB index if index points to R/ESP

2017-02-23 Thread Joe Perches
On Thu, 2017-02-23 at 14:17 -0800, Ricardo Neri wrote: > On Thu, 2017-02-23 at 08:24 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 10:36:50PM -0800, Ricardo Neri wrote: > > > + /* > > > + * A negative offset generally means a error, except > > > +

Re: [PATCH v4 03/17] x86/mpx, x86/insn: Relocate insn util functions to a new insn-kernel

2017-02-23 Thread Ricardo Neri
On Thu, 2017-02-23 at 18:54 +0800, kbuild test robot wrote: > >> arch/x86/lib/insn-eval.c:106:21: error: static declaration of > 'insn_get_addr_ref' follows non-static declaration > static void __user *insn_get_addr_ref(struct insn *insn, struct > pt_regs *regs) >

Re: [PATCH v4 01/17] x86/mpx: Do not use SIB index if index points to R/ESP

2017-02-23 Thread Ricardo Neri
On Thu, 2017-02-23 at 08:24 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 10:36:50PM -0800, Ricardo Neri wrote: > > + /* > > +* A negative offset generally means a error, except > > +* -EDOM, which means that the contents of the

Coding style vs legibility [was Re: [PATCH v4 01/17] x86/mpx: Do not use SIB index if index points to R/ESP]

2017-02-23 Thread Mouse
> Certainly if you have code with an odd mix of styles it is much > harder to read, and ultimately source code is for *humans* to > understand. So enforcing a consistent style, even if it is not your > own style, makes it much easier to follow! It can. It doesn't always. I've yet to see a

Re: [PATCH v4 15/17] x86/traps: Fixup general protection faults caused by UMIP

2017-02-23 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 10:37:04PM -0800, Ricardo Neri wrote: > @@ -492,6 +493,9 @@ do_general_protection(struct pt_regs *regs, long > error_code) > RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN(!rcu_is_watching(), "entry code didn't wake RCU"); > cond_local_irq_enable(regs); > > + if (user_mode(regs) &&

Re: [PATCH v4 03/17] x86/mpx, x86/insn: Relocate insn util functions to a new insn-kernel

2017-02-23 Thread kbuild test robot
Hi Ricardo, [auto build test ERROR on tip/auto-latest] [also build test ERROR on v4.10 next-20170223] [cannot apply to tip/x86/core] [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help improve the system] url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Ricardo-Neri

Re: [PATCH v4 01/17] x86/mpx: Do not use SIB index if index points to R/ESP

2017-02-23 Thread Paul Crawford
On 23/02/17 07:24, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 10:36:50PM -0800, Ricardo Neri wrote: + /* +* A negative offset generally means a error, except +* -EDOM, which means that the contents of the register +