On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 04:35:28PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 04:48:44PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 06:44:36PM -0700, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> > > --- a/arch/x86/mm/fault.c
> > > +++ b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c
> > > @@ -1219,6 +1219,8 @@ void d
On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 01:14:53PM -0700, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 04:48:44PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 06:44:36PM -0700, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> > > --- a/arch/x86/mm/fault.c
> > > +++ b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c
> > > @@ -1219,6 +1219,8 @@ voi
On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 04:48:44PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 06:44:36PM -0700, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> > --- a/arch/x86/mm/fault.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c
> > @@ -1219,6 +1219,8 @@ void do_user_addr_fault(struct pt_regs *regs,
> > struct mm_struct *mm;
> >
On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 04:48:44PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 06:44:36PM -0700, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> > --- a/arch/x86/mm/fault.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c
> > @@ -1219,6 +1219,8 @@ void do_user_addr_fault(struct pt_regs *regs,
> > struct mm_struct *mm;
> >
On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 06:44:36PM -0700, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> --- a/arch/x86/mm/fault.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c
> @@ -1219,6 +1219,8 @@ void do_user_addr_fault(struct pt_regs *regs,
> struct mm_struct *mm;
> vm_fault_t fault;
> unsigned int flags = FAULT_FLAG_DEFAULT;
>
Attempt speculative mm fault handling first, and fall back to the
existing (non-speculative) code if that fails.
The speculative handling closely mirrors the non-speculative logic.
This includes some x86 specific bits such as the access_error() call.
This is why we chose to implement the speculati
6 matches
Mail list logo