Hi Christoph,
On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 6:22 AM Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, Jul 09, 2021 at 12:31:45PM +1200, Michael Schmitz wrote:
That patch works fine on a casual test. What you did to
__constant_copy_to_user() does not appear to matter - but I haven't put the
system under any kind of stress yet. I'm a little reluctant to do that
(recovering from a trashed boot disk is a little dicey), I'll probably only
try that with your changes to __constant_copy_to_user() from commit
d36105c942e0 backed out.
As Linus pointed out, small copy_to_user basically doesn't happen as
we have switched all the suspect call sites to just use put_user.
Geert: do you care about __constant_copy_to_user at all, or can we just
kill it (as well as the copy_from_user side)?
If it blocks you, feel free to remove it.
BTW, do you have an idea of how many calls use small sizes?
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
