Re: [RFC][PATCH 5/8] x86/mm: fix exception table comments

[Dave Hansen]

>> +	Â* Only do the expensive exception table search when we might be at
>> +	Â* risk of a deadlock:
>> +	Â* 1. We failed to acquire mmap_sem, and
>> +	Â* 2. The access was an explicit kernel-mode access
>> +	Â*ÂÂÂÂ(X86_PF_USER=0).
> 
> Might be worth reminding the reader that X86_PF_USER will be set in
> sw_error_code for implicit accesses. ÂI saw "explicit" and my mind
> immediately jumped to hw_error_code for whatever reason. ÂE.g.:
> 
> 	* 2. The access was an explicit kernel-mode access (we set X86_PF_USER
> 	* Â Âin sw_error_code for implicit kernel-mode accesses).

Yeah, that was not worded well.  Is this better?

>          * Only do the expensive exception table search when we might be at
>          * risk of a deadlock:
>          * 1. We failed to acquire mmap_sem, and
>          * 2. The access was an explicit kernel-mode access.  An access
>          *    from user-mode will X86_PF_USER=1 set via hw_error_code or
>          *    set in sw_error_code if it were an implicit kernel-mode
>          *    access that originated in user mode.