Re: [PATCH 03/17] x86: split __copy_{from,to}_user() into "guest" and "unsafe" variants

2021-02-09 Thread Jan Beulich
On 09.02.2021 17:06, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 04:04:32PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: >> The "guest" variants are intended to work with (potentially) fully guest >> controlled addresses, while the "unsafe" variants are not. Subsequently >> we will want them to have different

Re: [PATCH 03/17] x86: split __copy_{from,to}_user() into "guest" and "unsafe" variants

2021-02-09 Thread Roger Pau Monné
On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 04:04:32PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: > The "guest" variants are intended to work with (potentially) fully guest > controlled addresses, while the "unsafe" variants are not. Subsequently > we will want them to have different behavior, so as first step identify > which one is

[PATCH 03/17] x86: split __copy_{from,to}_user() into "guest" and "unsafe" variants

2021-01-14 Thread Jan Beulich
The "guest" variants are intended to work with (potentially) fully guest controlled addresses, while the "unsafe" variants are not. Subsequently we will want them to have different behavior, so as first step identify which one is which. For now, both groups of constructs alias one another. Double