Re: [PATCH] s390/zcrypt: remove set_fs() invocation in zcrypt device driver

2020-09-15 Thread Harald Freudenberger
And here is now my part for the remove set_fs() branch: The difference to the 1st version is only as Christoph suggested to break the long lines of the function declaration into smaller ones. >From 38b328bfb1b88787eb0e4cc68875c681de5e32a6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:

Re: [PATCH] s390/zcrypt: remove set_fs() invocation in zcrypt device driver

2020-09-14 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 09:36:07AM +0200, Harald Freudenberger wrote: > Christoph, maybe you have a greater idea on how to solve this. So don't > hesitate and tell me. > Otherwise how to we provide this fix then ? My recommendation would be to go > the 'usual' way: > Commit this s390 internal and

Re: [PATCH] s390/zcrypt: remove set_fs() invocation in zcrypt device driver

2020-09-14 Thread Heiko Carstens
On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 09:36:07AM +0200, Harald Freudenberger wrote: > Otherwise how to we provide this fix then ? My recommendation would > be to go the 'usual' way: Commit this s390 internal and then let > this go out with the next kernel merge window when next time Linus > is pulling patches fr

Re: [PATCH] s390/zcrypt: remove set_fs() invocation in zcrypt device driver

2020-09-14 Thread Harald Freudenberger
On 11.09.20 08:21, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 12:28:38PM +0200, Harald Freudenberger wrote: >> +static inline unsigned long z_copy_from_user(bool userspace, >> + void *to, const void __user *from, >> unsigned long n) > Can you avoid t

Re: [PATCH] s390/zcrypt: remove set_fs() invocation in zcrypt device driver

2020-09-10 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 12:28:38PM +0200, Harald Freudenberger wrote: > +static inline unsigned long z_copy_from_user(bool userspace, > + void *to, const void __user *from, > unsigned long n) Can you avoid the pointless long lines in the function declarati