19 Oct
2020
19 Oct
'20
9:37 a.m.
On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 10:14:10PM -0700, Ira Weiny wrote:
so it either needs to explicitly do so, or have an assertion that preemption is indeed disabled.
However, I don't think I understand clearly. Doesn't [get|put]_cpu_ptr() handle the preempt_disable() for us?
It does.
Is it not sufficient to rely on that?
It is.
Dave's comment seems to be the opposite where we need to eliminate preempt disable before calling write_pkrs().
FWIW I think I'm mistaken in my response to Dave regarding the preempt_disable() in pks_update_protection().
Dave's concern is that we're calling with with preemption already disabled so disabling it again is superfluous.