From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67B49EB64DB for ; Tue, 20 Jun 2023 18:08:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id F40FA8D0002; Tue, 20 Jun 2023 14:08:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id EF0518D0001; Tue, 20 Jun 2023 14:08:48 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id DB8528D0002; Tue, 20 Jun 2023 14:08:48 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0017.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.17]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA2648D0001 for ; Tue, 20 Jun 2023 14:08:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin19.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80E2E1A062A for ; Tue, 20 Jun 2023 18:08:48 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 80923911936.19.13D724A Received: from out-55.mta1.migadu.com (out-55.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.55]) by imf21.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C0491C0006 for ; Tue, 20 Jun 2023 18:08:46 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf21.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=linux.dev header.s=key1 header.b=l9LNQKCR; spf=pass (imf21.hostedemail.com: domain of kent.overstreet@linux.dev designates 95.215.58.55 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=kent.overstreet@linux.dev; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=linux.dev ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1687284526; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=uieB0uDJdV3Z2GtXLTESpNEU2SaPfLYBzXkq3w1FWM4=; b=fskBBM/1WBif66zKaAhwzA+VGJQBQ1WRDHLx6iQHMfBdE3UPV5B4Z7QdTS9p1rXEQMHu8V xzV64SHKNreVIf3IDHcHaOpyeUcdp1H/ddHCzcxwg8tYOrXvpofusKLGLPxiEUYnou6Te0 0Vssz+owtzbebg3nzOhmFc/kGXE/eIg= ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1687284526; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=3hKeLhzFTcj6AxKBkEjPK6IIIVAnJgGWatzG/8bTHybqD/vAOH6BmKkIW1yFR58awTORf/ XQiisC+xOiFWyuYvEdtbaKQPej14LRxE+JheN9UPkUuW6swRv5xQS/WHPFXBybJb7a4uCU oO1c136gQmHLm2TIlFarK4bpy4OQJeg= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf21.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=linux.dev header.s=key1 header.b=l9LNQKCR; spf=pass (imf21.hostedemail.com: domain of kent.overstreet@linux.dev designates 95.215.58.55 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=kent.overstreet@linux.dev; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=linux.dev Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2023 14:08:39 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1687284524; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=uieB0uDJdV3Z2GtXLTESpNEU2SaPfLYBzXkq3w1FWM4=; b=l9LNQKCRfl5hVxGylNeDu6+QvrufJx1VRN3rZ9aNaIZx+ebGT73VOxZXGQCCmrH1zf3UQ4 /ZCqggGHY4tXz4lK5ZfhHEO8UgXc0MuyuiLKyj4QvMCbcQ4bklk72tfx6Hir6jzovBQWVo ztIqCXAuKSpqJRhecuoiRwPnw97z/Sc= X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Kent Overstreet To: Andy Lutomirski Cc: Mark Rutland , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, "linux-bcachefs@vger.kernel.org" , Kent Overstreet , Andrew Morton , Uladzislau Rezki , "hch@infradead.org" , linux-mm@kvack.org, Kees Cook , the arch/x86 maintainers Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/32] mm: Bring back vmalloc_exec Message-ID: <20230620180839.oodfav5cz234pph7@moria.home.lan> References: <20230509165657.1735798-1-kent.overstreet@linux.dev> <20230509165657.1735798-8-kent.overstreet@linux.dev> <20230619104717.3jvy77y3quou46u3@moria.home.lan> <20230619191740.2qmlza3inwycljih@moria.home.lan> <5ef2246b-9fe5-4206-acf0-0ce1f4469e6c@app.fastmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5ef2246b-9fe5-4206-acf0-0ce1f4469e6c@app.fastmail.com> X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 6C0491C0006 X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam11 X-Stat-Signature: u54fyw53nww5gs7xx883upou4rgr6smi X-HE-Tag: 1687284526-167318 X-HE-Meta: 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 rmQpeCZD lWwsSfAK3pBiYDVlDrr3VzJqAIt6YMOUcclO4EKj6lasDcHnQ1b2CZ7iRfbSxPrvCJadmjpUAvQvT4ZPr4r6B8/hwrkT9GdoUTrs6JkuPWvL4ai1dUlE8DRRaJuurX8FkhkZPLp9mmbO0U+hA7Y74zAe+NSZAubVw57FVH4xtWR0Z09+xOk4SYhcFD5WK0z24MzyeKzFfhRJuqss= X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 10:42:02AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > Code is either correct, and comes with an explanation as to how it is > correct, or it doesn't go in. Saying that something is like BPF is > not an explanation as to how it's correct. Saying that someone has > not come up with the chain of events that causes a mere violation of > architecture rules to actual incorrect execution is not an explanation > as to how something is correct. No, I'm saying your concerns are baseless and too vague to address. > text_poke() by itself is *not* the proper API, as discussed. It > doesn't serialize adequately, even on x86. We have text_poke_sync() > for that. Andy, I replied explaining the difference between text_poke() and text_poke_sync(). It's clear you have no idea what you're talking about, so I'm not going to be wasting my time on further communications with you.