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=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable 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 5838EC004E6 for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 20:33:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E09020665 for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 20:33:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726523AbfF0UdA convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Jun 2019 16:33:00 -0400 Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:11761 "EHLO mga09.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726443AbfF0UdA (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Jun 2019 16:33:00 -0400 X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga007.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.58]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 27 Jun 2019 13:32:59 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.63,425,1557212400"; d="scan'208";a="153164120" Received: from orsmsx108.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.22.240.6]) by orsmga007.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 27 Jun 2019 13:32:59 -0700 Received: from orsmsx116.amr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.7.97]) by ORSMSX108.amr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.2.227]) with mapi id 14.03.0439.000; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 13:32:58 -0700 From: "Xing, Cedric" To: Jarkko Sakkinen , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "x86@kernel.org" , "linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org" , "Christopherson, Sean J" CC: "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , "Hansen, Dave" , "nhorman@redhat.com" , "npmccallum@redhat.com" , "Ayoun, Serge" , "Katz-zamir, Shay" , "Huang, Haitao" , "andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com" , "tglx@linutronix.de" , "Svahn, Kai" , "bp@alien8.de" , "josh@joshtriplett.org" , "luto@kernel.org" , "Huang, Kai" , "rientjes@google.com" , Andy Lutomirski , Dave Hansen Subject: RE: [PATCH v20 22/28] x86/traps: Attempt to fixup exceptions in vDSO before signaling Thread-Topic: [PATCH v20 22/28] x86/traps: Attempt to fixup exceptions in vDSO before signaling Thread-Index: AQHVK2zZgzHDWzFJwEGh+L3RXyNlXaav93CQ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2019 20:32:58 +0000 Message-ID: <960B34DE67B9E140824F1DCDEC400C0F6551B873@ORSMSX116.amr.corp.intel.com> References: <20190417103938.7762-1-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> <20190417103938.7762-23-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> <20190625154341.GA7046@linux.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <20190625154341.GA7046@linux.intel.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-titus-metadata-40: eyJDYXRlZ29yeUxhYmVscyI6IiIsIk1ldGFkYXRhIjp7Im5zIjoiaHR0cDpcL1wvd3d3LnRpdHVzLmNvbVwvbnNcL0ludGVsMyIsImlkIjoiNjA1NDc5NTktYTdlOC00ZmM5LTgzYTYtN2E3MmQ5Y2Q0NWRkIiwicHJvcHMiOlt7Im4iOiJDVFBDbGFzc2lmaWNhdGlvbiIsInZhbHMiOlt7InZhbHVlIjoiQ1RQX05UIn1dfV19LCJTdWJqZWN0TGFiZWxzIjpbXSwiVE1DVmVyc2lvbiI6IjE3LjEwLjE4MDQuNDkiLCJUcnVzdGVkTGFiZWxIYXNoIjoiTlV4b3BLVFNDUEI1ZGw0Y3lzU1BwbnY4RlZsRWZuQ0NHRGtpdzY1K2NvMTFQTUkxOGtpT01hK053SmxJaGVYbiJ9 x-ctpclassification: CTP_NT dlp-product: dlpe-windows dlp-version: 11.2.0.6 dlp-reaction: no-action x-originating-ip: [10.22.254.140] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > From: linux-sgx-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-sgx- > owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Jarkko Sakkinen > Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2019 8:44 AM > > I went through the vDSO changes just to revisit couple of details that I > had forgotten. Sean, if you don't mind I'd squash this and prepending > patch. Just a reminder that #DB/#BP shall be treated differently because they are used by debuggers. So instead of branching to the fixup address, the kernel shall just signal the process. > > Is there any obvious reason why #PF fixup is in its own patch and the > rest are collected to the same patch? I would not find it confusing if > there was one patch per exception but really don't get this division. > > /Jarkko