Remove them from the arch-specific file.
Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <gcosta@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
We also carry the unaligned version with us. Only x86_64 uses
it, but there's no problem in defining it.
Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <gcosta@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Move both versions, which are highly similar, to uaccess.h.
Note that, for x86_64, X86_WP_WORKS_OK is always defined.
Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <gcosta@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
We also check user pointer in x86_64 put_user, the way i386 does.
In a separate patch for bisecting purposes.
Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <gcosta@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Move __get_user_asm and __get_user_size and __get_user_nocheck
to uaccess.h. This requires us to define a macro at __get_user_size
for the 64-bit access case.
Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <gcosta@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Let the user of the macro specify the desired return.
Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <gcosta@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Move both __put_user_asm and __put_user_size to
uaccess.h. i386 already had a special function for 64-bit access,
so for x86_64, we just define a macro with the same name.
Note that for X86_64, CONFIG_X86_WP_WORKS_OK will always
be defined, so the #else part will never be even compiled in.
Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <gcosta@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Let the user of the macro specify the desired return.
Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <gcosta@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Take it out of uaccess_32.h. Since it seems that no users
of the x86_64 exists, we simply pick the i386 version.
Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <gcosta@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Merge versions of getuser from uaccess_32.h and uaccess_64.h into
uaccess.h. There is a part which is 64-bit only (for now), and for
that, we use a __get_user_8 macro.
Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <gcosta@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Common parts of uaccess_32.h and uaccess_64.h
are put in uaccess.h. Bits in uaccess_32.h and
uaccess_64.h that come to this file are equal
except for comments and whitespaces differences.
Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <gcosta@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Using explicit hexa (0xFFFFFFUL) introduces an unnecessary difference
between i386 and x86_64 because of the size of their long. Use -1UL instead.
Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <gcosta@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Put the likely hint in access_ok. Just for
bisectability.
Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <gcosta@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Our integration efforts broke a build with this function being used
with i386. Reason is "g" can put the operand in an imm32, which according
to The Book (tm), is invalid as the second operand.
This is actually a bug
in x86_64 too, since the x86_64 instruction set reference does not list
it as valid.
We probably didn't trigger this before due to the ammount of
registers available for 64-bit platforms. But that's just my guess.
Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <gcosta@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
For i386, __range_not_ok is a better name than __range_ok, since
it returns 0 when it is in fact okay. Other than that,
both versions does not need the word size specifiers, and we remove them.
Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <gcosta@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
This is consistent with i386 usage.
Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <gcosta@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Instead of clobbering r8, clobber rbx, which is the i386 way.
Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <gcosta@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
There's really no reason to clobber r8 or pass the address in rcx.
We can safely use only two registers (which we already have to touch anyway)
to do the job.
Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <gcosta@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Use the _ASM_EXTABLE macro from <asm/asm.h>, instead of open-coding
__ex_table entires in include/asm-x86/uaccess_64.h.
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Use the fixup_exception() helper in fault_64.c
Signed-off-by: Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Move the headers to include/asm-x86 and fixup the
header install make rules
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
