On Wed, 23 Oct 2019, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 02:27:10PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > --- a/arch/x86/mm/fault.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c
> > @@ -1500,10 +1500,13 @@ static noinline void
> > return;
> >
> > /* Was the fault on kernel-controlled part of the address space? */
> > - if (unlikely(fault_in_kernel_space(address)))
> > + if (unlikely(fault_in_kernel_space(address))) {
> > do_kern_addr_fault(regs, hw_error_code, address);
> > - else
> > + } else {
> > do_user_addr_fault(regs, hw_error_code, address);
> > + if (regs->flags & X86_EFLAGS_IF)
> > + local_irq_disable();
> > + }
>
> The corresponding irq enable is in do_user_addr_fault(), why not do the
> disable there?
Yeah, will do. Was just as lazy as Peter and did not want to touch the
gazillion of returns. :)
Thanks,
tglx
