Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Fri, 8 Feb 2008, Jan Kiszka wrote: > >> Well, let's try it this way: Find below a patch against kgdb.git that >> removes the special fault handling (this wouldn't be the first feature I >> recently removed from kgdb :->). Light testing revealed no obvious >> problems yet. >> > > That is indeed horrible code. No way will I merge anything that has things > like that even in it's *history* (ie somebody needs to re-generate the > tree without code like that - some things should not be allowed to exist). > >
I concur. I will collapse the entire kgdb tree back to the original few patches which can be bisected. > That said, while just using "probe_kernel_addr()" is certainly much > better, it's still really inefficient. If you actually want to do a "safe > memory copy", then the right way to do that is basically to do > > pagefault_disable(); > leftover = __copy_from_user_inatomic(dst, src, count); > pagefault_enable(); > > if (leftover) > handle_the_fact_that_the_copy_didnt_complete(); > > Duly Noted. Further cleanups are in progress. Thanks, Jason. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
