On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 10:37 -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 05:33:59PM +0000, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 12:26:10PM -0500, Doug Ledford wrote:
> >
> > > > > A per-char put_user() sounds pretty expensive since you are having to do
> > > > > a __uaccess_begin();__uaccess_end() around every put_user(). I took it
> > > > > as is, but it might be worth considering doing something like a 32
> > > > > byte
> > > >
> > > > This patch requries the last series of write() handlers before it will
> > > > work properly, don't apply it just yet - will create a crazy security
> > > > problem..
> > >
> > > Yes, I thought I saw you say you applied it already? And I started from
> > > your wip/jgg-for-next that's currently pushed. Was I incorrect in that?
> >
> > That is the right branch, but there are three series reworking write,
> > only the first two are applied, the last one still in patchworks
> > didn't get applied yet..
>
> Oh wait, I read this entirely wrong :( You are good, sorry..
>
> For some reason I thought we were talking about a different patch
>
> Jason
Now I starting to think you are just having a bit of fun at my expense!
;-)
--
Doug Ledford <dledford@xxxxxxxxxx>
GPG KeyID: B826A3330E572FDD
Key fingerprint = AE6B 1BDA 122B 23B4 265B 1274 B826 A333 0E57 2FDD
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
