* [PATCH][0/10] verify_area cleanup
@ 2005-03-04 2:47 Jesper Juhl
2005-03-13 19:56 ` William Lee Irwin III
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Jesper Juhl @ 2005-03-04 2:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
Cc: Andrew Morton, Ian Molton, Russell King, Geert Uytterhoeven,
Matthew Wilcox, Tony Luck, Paul Mackerras, David S. Miller,
William L. Irwin, Andi Kleen, Richard Henderson
Now that 2.6.11 is out the door it's time to try and submit this again.
The following patches convert all users of verify_area to access_ok and
the final patch then deprecates verify_area acros all archs with the
intention of removing it completely later. These patches get rid of 99+%
of all users, there's still one or two macros left using it and there are
still a few comments left refering to it that could be cleaned up - I'll
get to those, but what remains after these patches is extremely little.
The reason for doing this is that verify_area is just a wrapper for
access_ok anyway, so there's no good reason to keep it around - access_ok
also seems more readable anyway with saner return values.
Since these patches touch things all over the tree the CC list would be
enormous if I CC'd everyone involved on all patches, so I'll just CC this
initial mail to a few key people I think are relevant (I hope I got that
list right), and the actual patches I'll just send to linux-kernel and
Andrew (or directly to people who ask for that).
I've split this into 10 patches like this :
[1] drivers part 1
This patch cleans up the first half of drivers/
[2] drivers part 2
This patch cleans up the second half of drivers/
[3] sound
Cleans up everything in sound/
[4] i386 and misc.
This cleans up arch/i386 plus kernel/ and a few other bits that
got left over from the other patches
[5] mips
Everything in arch/mips
[6] ppc, ppc64, m68k, m68knommu
ppc, ppc64, m68k and m68knommu cleanup are in this on
[7] sparc and sparc64
Thi patch takes care of sparc and sparc64
[8] x86_64 and ia64
cleanups for x86_64 and ia64 are in this patch
[9] misc remaining archs
all remaining archs are cleaned up in one bunch by this patch
[10] deprecate
This final patch deprecates verify_area across all archs.
I've been hoping that these could perhaps (after proper review of course)
go into -mm to actually get some testing beyond what I'm able to do, so
that maybe they could migrate into mainline within a release or two...
Speaking of testing, the changes in [4] are what affect my box here, so
those I've been able to both build and boot. As for the rest, I've only
been able to verify that a make of allyesconfig doesn't seem to have
issues with these patches, but I don't have any way to actually boot test
on anything but i386. But I think these patches are fairly low risk since
the change from verify_area to access_ok is resonably simple in most
cases.
I hope you will find the patches acceptable and I look forward to any
feedback you might have.
--
Jesper Juhl
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH][0/10] verify_area cleanup
2005-03-04 2:47 [PATCH][0/10] verify_area cleanup Jesper Juhl
@ 2005-03-13 19:56 ` William Lee Irwin III
2005-03-13 22:03 ` Jesper Juhl
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: William Lee Irwin III @ 2005-03-13 19:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jesper Juhl
Cc: linux-kernel, Andrew Morton, Ian Molton, Russell King,
Geert Uytterhoeven, Matthew Wilcox, Tony Luck, Paul Mackerras,
David S. Miller, Andi Kleen, Richard Henderson
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 03:47:07AM +0100, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> Now that 2.6.11 is out the door it's time to try and submit this again.
> The following patches convert all users of verify_area to access_ok and
> the final patch then deprecates verify_area acros all archs with the
> intention of removing it completely later. These patches get rid of 99+%
> of all users, there's still one or two macros left using it and there are
> still a few comments left refering to it that could be cleaned up - I'll
> get to those, but what remains after these patches is extremely little.
> The reason for doing this is that verify_area is just a wrapper for
> access_ok anyway, so there's no good reason to keep it around - access_ok
> also seems more readable anyway with saner return values.
> Since these patches touch things all over the tree the CC list would be
> enormous if I CC'd everyone involved on all patches, so I'll just CC this
> initial mail to a few key people I think are relevant (I hope I got that
> list right), and the actual patches I'll just send to linux-kernel and
> Andrew (or directly to people who ask for that).
The execution at first glance appears good. Out of curiosity, does this
serve a larger purpose than eliminating a redundant API?
-- wli
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH][0/10] verify_area cleanup
2005-03-13 19:56 ` William Lee Irwin III
@ 2005-03-13 22:03 ` Jesper Juhl
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Jesper Juhl @ 2005-03-13 22:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: William Lee Irwin III
Cc: linux-kernel, Andrew Morton, Ian Molton, Russell King,
Geert Uytterhoeven, Matthew Wilcox, Tony Luck, Paul Mackerras,
David S. Miller, Andi Kleen, Richard Henderson
On Sun, 13 Mar 2005, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 03:47:07AM +0100, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> > Now that 2.6.11 is out the door it's time to try and submit this again.
> > The following patches convert all users of verify_area to access_ok and
> > the final patch then deprecates verify_area acros all archs with the
> > intention of removing it completely later. These patches get rid of 99+%
> > of all users, there's still one or two macros left using it and there are
> > still a few comments left refering to it that could be cleaned up - I'll
> > get to those, but what remains after these patches is extremely little.
> > The reason for doing this is that verify_area is just a wrapper for
> > access_ok anyway, so there's no good reason to keep it around - access_ok
> > also seems more readable anyway with saner return values.
> > Since these patches touch things all over the tree the CC list would be
> > enormous if I CC'd everyone involved on all patches, so I'll just CC this
> > initial mail to a few key people I think are relevant (I hope I got that
> > list right), and the actual patches I'll just send to linux-kernel and
> > Andrew (or directly to people who ask for that).
>
> The execution at first glance appears good.
Thank you - Andrew found a few places where I'd messed up, but corrected
those silently and merged the patches into -mm, so hopefully they can now
get some proper testing.
>Out of curiosity, does this
> serve a larger purpose than eliminating a redundant API?
>
No, it's a redundant API and one that seems harder to get right (judging
from all the comments about fixing up incorrect verify_area use all over
the place) than acces_ok. That's the only reason for getting rid of it.
--
Jesper
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2005-03-13 22:02 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2005-03-04 2:47 [PATCH][0/10] verify_area cleanup Jesper Juhl
2005-03-13 19:56 ` William Lee Irwin III
2005-03-13 22:03 ` Jesper Juhl
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®