Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 15:28:29 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <>
To: Nadav Amit <>
Cc: Rick Edgecombe <>,
	Andy Lutomirski <>, Ingo Molnar <>,
	LKML <>, X86 ML <>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <>,
	Thomas Gleixner <>,
	Dave Hansen <>,
	Peter Zijlstra <>,
	Damian Tometzki <>,
	linux-integrity <>,
	LSM List <>,
	Andrew Morton <>,
	Kernel Hardening <>,
	Linux-MM <>, Will Deacon <>,
	Ard Biesheuvel <>,
	Kristen Carlson Accardi <>,
	"Dock, Deneen T" <>,
	Kees Cook <>,
	Dave Hansen <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/20] x86/mm: temporary mm struct

On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:19:54PM +0000, Nadav Amit wrote:
> Having a different struct can prevent the misuse of using mm_structs in
> unuse_temporary_mm() that were not “used” using use_temporary_mm. The
> typedef, I presume, can deter users from starting to play with the internal
> “private” fields.

Ok, makes sense.

> > That prev.prev below looks unnecessary, instead of just using prev.
> > 
> >> +	struct mm_struct *prev;
> > 
> > Why "prev”?
> This is obviously the previous active mm. Feel free to suggest an
> alternative name.

Well, when I look at the typedef I'm wondering why is it called "prev"
but I guess this is to mean that it will be saving the previously used
mm, so ack.



Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.