> > functions. But, the difference in usage between both of them seems very > > subtle. Could this be easily misused? > > Logically there are two completely different things: > > 1. Touching userspace > 2. Touching the lower half of the address space > > If it's only userspace in the lower half of the address space, then > there's no controversy. But the problem obviously occurs when you want > to touch kernel mappings in the lower half of the address space. Why does the kernel create the mappings to poke kernel text for ALTERNATIVE patching in the lower half of the address space? Instead of special "we really to want to access the lower addresses" code, wouldn't it be easier to map the "poke" virtual addresses in normal kernel upper-half space? -Tony
