On Thu, 28 Mar 2019 19:10:07 +0100
Andrey Konovalov <andreyk...@google.com> wrote:
> > > Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov <andreyk...@google.com>
> > > ---
> > > ipc/shm.c | 2 ++
> > > mm/madvise.c | 2 ++
> > > mm/mempolicy.c | 5 +++++
> > > mm/migrate.c | 1 +
> > > mm/mincore.c | 2 ++
> > > mm/mlock.c | 5 +++++
> > > mm/mmap.c | 7 +++++++
> > > mm/mprotect.c | 1 +
> > > mm/mremap.c | 2 ++
> > > mm/msync.c | 2 ++
> > > 10 files changed, 29 insertions(+)
> >
> > I wonder whether it's better to keep these as wrappers in the arm64
> > code.
>
> I don't think I understand what you propose, could you elaborate?
I believe Catalin is saying that instead of placing things like:
@@ -1593,6 +1593,7 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE3(shmat, int, shmid, char __user *,
shmaddr, int, shmflg)
unsigned long ret;
long err;
+ shmaddr = untagged_addr(shmaddr);
To instead have the shmaddr set to the untagged_addr() before calling
the system call, and passing the untagged addr to the system call, as
that goes through the arm64 architecture specific code first.
-- Steve
_______________________________________________
amd-gfx mailing list
amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx
