On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 9:19 AM, Linus Torvalds <torva...@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Steven Rostedt <rost...@goodmis.org> wrote: >> >> Actually, in_nmi() is now safe for vmalloc faults. In fact, it handles the >> clobbering of the cr2 register just fine. > > That's not what I object to and find incorrect wrt NMI. > > Compare the simple and correct 32-bit code to the complex and > incorrect 64-bit code. > > In particular, look at how the 32-bit code relies *entirely* on hardware > state. > > Then look at where the 64-bit code does not.
Both mystify me. Why does the 32-bit version walk down the hierarchy at all instead of just touching the top level? And why does the 64-bit version assert that the leaves of the tables match? It's already asserted that it's walking down pgd pointers that are *exactly the same pointers*, so of course the stuff they point to is the same. --Andy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/