On Thu, May 02, 2019 at 05:10:55PM +0200, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
> On Thu, 2 May 2019 16:31:10 +0200
> Greg KH wrote:
>
> > On Thu, May 02, 2019 at 04:17:58PM +0200, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2 May 2019 14:21:28 +0200
> > > Greg KH wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Mon, Apr 15, 2019
Greg KH writes:
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 09:17:10AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 10:19 PM Christoph Hellwig
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Can we please have the page refcount overflow fixes out on the list
>> > for review, even if it is after the fact?
>>
>> They were
On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 09:17:10AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> I ruthlessly also entirely ignored MIPS, SH and sparc, since they seem
> largely irrelevant, partly since even theoretically this whole issue
> needs a _lot_ of memory.
Adding the relevant people - while the might be irrelevant, at
On Thu, 2 May 2019 16:31:10 +0200
Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, May 02, 2019 at 04:17:58PM +0200, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
> > On Thu, 2 May 2019 14:21:28 +0200
> > Greg KH wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 09:17:10AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 10:19 PM
On Thu, May 02, 2019 at 04:17:58PM +0200, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
> On Thu, 2 May 2019 14:21:28 +0200
> Greg KH wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 09:17:10AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > > On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 10:19 PM Christoph Hellwig
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Can we please
On Thu, 2 May 2019 14:21:28 +0200
Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 09:17:10AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 10:19 PM Christoph Hellwig
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Can we please have the page refcount overflow fixes out on the list
> > > for review, even if it is
On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 09:17:10AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 10:19 PM Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> >
> > Can we please have the page refcount overflow fixes out on the list
> > for review, even if it is after the fact?
>
> They were actually on a list for review long
On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 8:39 AM Martin Schwidefsky
wrote:
>
> Ok, I added two patches for my s390/linux:features branch
>
> Martin Schwidefsky (2):
> s390/mm: make the pxd_offset functions more robust
> s390/mm: convert to the generic get_user_pages_fast code
>
> All code changes are
On Fri, 19 Apr 2019 10:27:17 -0700
Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 6:33 AM Martin Schwidefsky
> wrote:
> >
> > That problem got stuck in my head and I thought more about it. Why not
> > emulate the static folding sequence in the s390 page table code?
>
> So this model seems
On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 6:33 AM Martin Schwidefsky
wrote:
>
> That problem got stuck in my head and I thought more about it. Why not
> emulate the static folding sequence in the s390 page table code?
So this model seems much closer to what x86 does in its folding, where
the pattern is basically
On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 20:41:44 +0200
Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 08:49:32 -0700
> Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 1:02 AM Martin Schwidefsky
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > The problematic lines in the generic gup code are these three:
> > >
> > > 1845: pmdp =
On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 08:49:32 -0700
Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 1:02 AM Martin Schwidefsky
> wrote:
> >
> > The problematic lines in the generic gup code are these three:
> >
> > 1845: pmdp = pmd_offset(, addr);
> > 1888: pudp = pud_offset(, addr);
> > 1916: p4dp =
On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 1:02 AM Martin Schwidefsky
wrote:
>
> The problematic lines in the generic gup code are these three:
>
> 1845: pmdp = pmd_offset(, addr);
> 1888: pudp = pud_offset(, addr);
> 1916: p4dp = p4d_offset(, addr);
>
> Passing the pointer of a *copy* of a page table entry
On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 09:57:01 -0700
Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 1:02 AM Martin Schwidefsky
> wrote:
> >
> > Grumpf, that does *not* work. For gup the table entries may be read only
> > once. Now I remember why I open-coded p4d_offset, pud_offset and pmd_offset
> > in
On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 1:02 AM Martin Schwidefsky
wrote:
>
> Grumpf, that does *not* work. For gup the table entries may be read only
> once. Now I remember why I open-coded p4d_offset, pud_offset and pmd_offset
> in arch/s390/mm/gup.c, to avoid to read the table entries twice.
> It will be hard
On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 09:46:37 +0200
Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 09:49:46 -0700
> Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 9:16 AM Linus Torvalds
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > We actually already *have* this function.
> > >
> > > It's called "gup_fast_permitted()" and
On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 09:49:46 -0700
Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 9:16 AM Linus Torvalds
> wrote:
> >
> > We actually already *have* this function.
> >
> > It's called "gup_fast_permitted()" and it's used by x86-64 to verify
> > the proper address range. Exactly like s390
On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 8:38 PM Michael Ellerman wrote:
>
> > That said, powerpc and s390 should at least look at maybe adding a
> > check for the page ref in their gup paths too. Powerpc has the special
> > gup_hugepte() case
>
> Which uses page_cache_add_speculative(), which handles the case of
[ Cc += Nick & Aneesh & Paul ]
Linus Torvalds writes:
> On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 10:19 PM Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>>
>> Can we please have the page refcount overflow fixes out on the list
>> for review, even if it is after the fact?
>
> They were actually on a list for review long before the
On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 9:16 AM Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>
> We actually already *have* this function.
>
> It's called "gup_fast_permitted()" and it's used by x86-64 to verify
> the proper address range. Exactly like s390 needs..
>
> Could you please use that instead?
IOW, something like the
On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 5:08 AM Martin Schwidefsky
wrote:
>
> This is not nice, would a patch like the following be acceptable?
Umm.
We actually already *have* this function.
It's called "gup_fast_permitted()" and it's used by x86-64 to verify
the proper address range. Exactly like s390
On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 11:09:06 +0200
Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Apr 2019 09:17:10 -0700
> Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 10:19 PM Christoph Hellwig
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Can we please have the page refcount overflow fixes out on the list
> > > for review,
On Mon, 15 Apr 2019 09:17:10 -0700
Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 10:19 PM Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> >
> > Can we please have the page refcount overflow fixes out on the list
> > for review, even if it is after the fact?
>
> They were actually on a list for review long
On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 10:19 PM Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
> Can we please have the page refcount overflow fixes out on the list
> for review, even if it is after the fact?
They were actually on a list for review long before the fact, but it
was the security mailing list. The issue actually got
24 matches
Mail list logo
