On Fri, May 01, 2020 at 12:41:05PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Currently copy_string_kernel is just a wrapper around copy_strings that > simplifies the calling conventions and uses set_fs to allow passing a > kernel pointer. But due to the fact the we only need to handle a single > kernel argument pointer, the logic can be sigificantly simplified while > getting rid of the set_fs.
I can live with that... BTW, why do we bother with flush_cache_page() (by way of get_arg_page()) here and in copy_strings()? How could *anything* have accessed that page by its address in new mm - what are we trying to flush here?
