From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Darren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-edac@vger.kernel.org" <linux-edac@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] futex, x86/mce: Avoid double machine checks
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2021 00:14:59 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210108231459.GC2453@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4493a015ffcd4d82bbea7d1e5c2e73e4@intel.com>
On Fri, Jan 08, 2021 at 11:08:58PM +0000, Luck, Tony wrote:
> > I think this is horrid; why can't we have it return something different
> > then -EFAULT instead?
>
> I did consider this ... but it appears that architectures aren't unified in the
> return value from get_user()
But surely none are currently returning -EMEMERR or whatever name we
come up with.
> Here's another function involved in the futex call chain leading to this:
>
> static int get_futex_value_locked(u32 *dest, u32 __user *from)
> {
> int ret;
>
> pagefault_disable();
> ret = __get_user(*dest, from);
> pagefault_enable();
>
> return ret ? -EFAULT : 0;
> }
>
> It seems like the expectation here is just "zero or not" and we
> don't care what the "not" value is ... just turn it into -EFAULT.
Yeah, saw that, but that should be trivially fixable I'm thinking.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-01-08 23:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-01-08 22:22 [PATCH 0/2] Fix infinite machine check loop in futex_wait_setup() Tony Luck
2021-01-08 22:22 ` [PATCH 1/2] x86/mce: Avoid infinite loop for copy from user recovery Tony Luck
2021-01-08 22:22 ` [PATCH 2/2] futex, x86/mce: Avoid double machine checks Tony Luck
2021-01-08 22:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-01-08 23:08 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-08 23:14 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2021-01-08 23:20 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-11 21:44 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] Fix infinite machine check loop in futex_wait_setup() Tony Luck
2021-01-11 21:44 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] x86/mce: Avoid infinite loop for copy from user recovery Tony Luck
2021-01-11 22:11 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-01-11 22:20 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-12 17:00 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-01-12 17:16 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-12 17:21 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-01-12 18:23 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-12 18:57 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-01-12 20:52 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-12 22:04 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-01-13 1:50 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-13 4:15 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-01-13 10:00 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-01-13 16:06 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-13 16:19 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-01-13 16:32 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-13 17:35 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-01-14 20:22 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-01-14 21:05 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-11 21:44 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] x86/mce: Add new return value to get_user() for machine check Tony Luck
2021-01-11 21:44 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] futex, x86/mce: Avoid double machine checks Tony Luck
2021-01-14 17:22 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] Fix infinite machine check loop in futex_wait_setup() Andy Lutomirski
2021-01-15 0:38 ` [PATCH v3] x86/mce: Avoid infinite loop for copy from user recovery Tony Luck
2021-01-15 15:27 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-01-15 19:34 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-15 20:51 ` [PATCH v4] " Luck, Tony
2021-01-15 23:23 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-19 10:56 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-01-19 23:57 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-20 12:18 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-01-20 17:17 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-21 21:09 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-25 22:55 ` [PATCH v5] " Luck, Tony
2021-01-26 11:03 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-01-26 22:36 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-28 17:57 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-02-01 18:58 ` Luck, Tony
2021-02-02 11:01 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-02-02 16:04 ` Luck, Tony
2021-02-02 21:06 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-02-02 22:12 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-18 15:39 ` [PATCH v3] " Borislav Petkov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20210108231459.GC2453@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dvhart@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-edac@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).