Subject: Re: useracc() or usercrack()?
To: None <>
From: Christos Zoulas <>
List: tech-kern
Date: 09/13/1998 12:59:49
In article <> (Charles M. Hannum) writes:
>So, I'd like to remedy this.  Either we should fix useracc() or we
>should remove it.  To fix it, I suggest:
>* Make it a machine-dependent function.  Have it check the permissions
>  in the page table and iff that fails call (u)vm_fault(), to handle
>  copy-on-write, etc.  (For reading, we could possibly just have it
>  try to read the page!  Very fast...)
>* Eliminate the extraneous uses of it just to detect errors early.
>  This is kind of pointless.
>* On ports with shared address spaces, switch back to using useracc()
>  and accessing the signal context directly.
>Any comments from the cashew gallery?

I suggest that we remove it.