Skip to content
  • Dan Williams's avatar
    ec6347bb
    x86, powerpc: Rename memcpy_mcsafe() to copy_mc_to_{user, kernel}() · ec6347bb
    Dan Williams authored
    In reaction to a proposal to introduce a memcpy_mcsafe_fast()
    implementation Linus points out that memcpy_mcsafe() is poorly named
    relative to communicating the scope of the interface. Specifically what
    addresses are valid to pass as source, destination, and what faults /
    exceptions are handled.
    
    Of particular concern is that even though x86 might be able to handle
    the semantics of copy_mc_to_user() with its common copy_user_generic()
    implementation other archs likely need / want an explicit path for this
    case:
    
      On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 11:28 AM Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
      >
      > On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 6:21 PM Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> wrote:
      > >
      > > However now I see that copy_user_generic() works for the wrong reason.
      > > It works because the exception on the source address due to poison
      > > looks no different than a write fault on the user address to the
      > > caller, it's still just a ...
    ec6347bb
    x86, powerpc: Rename memcpy_mcsafe() to copy_mc_to_{user, kernel}()
    Dan Williams authored
    In reaction to a proposal to introduce a memcpy_mcsafe_fast()
    implementation Linus points out that memcpy_mcsafe() is poorly named
    relative to communicating the scope of the interface. Specifically what
    addresses are valid to pass as source, destination, and what faults /
    exceptions are handled.
    
    Of particular concern is that even though x86 might be able to handle
    the semantics of copy_mc_to_user() with its common copy_user_generic()
    implementation other archs likely need / want an explicit path for this
    case:
    
      On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 11:28 AM Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
      >
      > On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 6:21 PM Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> wrote:
      > >
      > > However now I see that copy_user_generic() works for the wrong reason.
      > > It works because the exception on the source address due to poison
      > > looks no different than a write fault on the user address to the
      > > caller, it's still just a ...
Loading