On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 10:10:07AM -0500, Pavel Tatashin wrote:
> Hi Mark,
>
> Thank you for reviewing this work.
> > The 'arch_' prefix should probably be 'asm_' (or have an '_asm' suffix),
> > since this is entirely local to the arch code, and even then should only
> > be called from the C wra
Hi Mark,
Thank you for reviewing this work.
> A commit message should provide rationale, rather than just a
> description of the patch. Something like:
>
> | We currently duplicate the logic to enable/disable uaccess via TTBR0,
> | with C functions and assembly macros. This is a maintenenace burd
Hi Pavel,
On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 09:24:05PM -0500, Pavel Tatashin wrote:
> Replace the uaccess_ttbr0_disable/uaccess_ttbr0_enable via
> inline variants, and remove asm macros.
A commit message should provide rationale, rather than just a
description of the patch. Something like:
| We currently
Replace the uaccess_ttbr0_disable/uaccess_ttbr0_enable via
inline variants, and remove asm macros.
Signed-off-by: Pavel Tatashin
---
arch/arm64/include/asm/asm-uaccess.h | 22
arch/arm64/include/asm/cacheflush.h | 38 +---
arch/arm64/mm/cache.S
