From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66ED9C433DF for ; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 14:02:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A5A920772 for ; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 14:02:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729470AbgGBOCQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Jul 2020 10:02:16 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:43252 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726343AbgGBOCQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Jul 2020 10:02:16 -0400 Received: from ZenIV.linux.org.uk (zeniv.linux.org.uk [IPv6:2002:c35c:fd02::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A710C08C5C1 for ; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 07:02:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from viro by ZenIV.linux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jqzmp-003yXo-RX; Thu, 02 Jul 2020 14:01:59 +0000 Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2020 15:01:59 +0100 From: Al Viro To: Michael Ellerman Cc: Linus Torvalds , Christophe Leroy , Josh Poimboeuf , Peter Zijlstra , the arch/x86 maintainers , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: objtool clac/stac handling change.. Message-ID: <20200702140159.GM2786714@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20200701184131.GI2786714@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20200701195914.GK2786714@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <87lfk26nx4.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87lfk26nx4.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 11:34:31PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > I think we can do something to make it work. > > We don't have an equivalent of x86's ex_handler_uaccess(), so it's not > quite as easy as whacking a user_access_end() in there. > > Probably the simplest option for us is to just handle it in our > unsafe_op_wrap(). I'll try and come up with something tomorrow. The goal is to avoid using unsafe_op_wrap()...