From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752050AbbLHSpw (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Dec 2015 13:45:52 -0500 Received: from www.linutronix.de ([62.245.132.108]:51804 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751805AbbLHSpu (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Dec 2015 13:45:50 -0500 Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2015 19:44:59 +0100 (CET) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Dave Hansen cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, x86@kernel.org, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, linux-api@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 28/34] x86: wire up mprotect_key() system call In-Reply-To: <20151204011503.2A095839@viggo.jf.intel.com> Message-ID: References: <20151204011424.8A36E365@viggo.jf.intel.com> <20151204011503.2A095839@viggo.jf.intel.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (DEB 23 2013-08-11) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Linutronix-Spam-Score: -1.0 X-Linutronix-Spam-Level: - X-Linutronix-Spam-Status: No , -1.0 points, 5.0 required, ALL_TRUSTED=-1,SHORTCIRCUIT=-0.0001 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 3 Dec 2015, Dave Hansen wrote: > #include > diff -puN mm/Kconfig~pkeys-16-x86-mprotect_key mm/Kconfig > --- a/mm/Kconfig~pkeys-16-x86-mprotect_key 2015-12-03 16:21:31.114920208 -0800 > +++ b/mm/Kconfig 2015-12-03 16:21:31.119920435 -0800 > @@ -679,4 +679,5 @@ config NR_PROTECTION_KEYS > # Everything supports a _single_ key, so allow folks to > # at least call APIs that take keys, but require that the > # key be 0. > + default 16 if X86_INTEL_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS > default 1 What happens if I set that to 42? I think we want to make this a runtime evaluated thingy. If pkeys are compiled in, but the machine does not support it then we don't support 16 keys, or do we? Thanks, tglx From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f50.google.com (mail-wm0-f50.google.com [74.125.82.50]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79F9F6B0253 for ; Tue, 8 Dec 2015 13:45:48 -0500 (EST) Received: by wmvv187 with SMTP id v187so226933767wmv.1 for ; Tue, 08 Dec 2015 10:45:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from Galois.linutronix.de (linutronix.de. [2001:470:1f0b:db:abcd:42:0:1]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id u185si6683687wmu.20.2015.12.08.10.45.47 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 08 Dec 2015 10:45:47 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2015 19:44:59 +0100 (CET) From: Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [PATCH 28/34] x86: wire up mprotect_key() system call In-Reply-To: <20151204011503.2A095839@viggo.jf.intel.com> Message-ID: References: <20151204011424.8A36E365@viggo.jf.intel.com> <20151204011503.2A095839@viggo.jf.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Dave Hansen Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, x86@kernel.org, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, linux-api@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 3 Dec 2015, Dave Hansen wrote: > #include > diff -puN mm/Kconfig~pkeys-16-x86-mprotect_key mm/Kconfig > --- a/mm/Kconfig~pkeys-16-x86-mprotect_key 2015-12-03 16:21:31.114920208 -0800 > +++ b/mm/Kconfig 2015-12-03 16:21:31.119920435 -0800 > @@ -679,4 +679,5 @@ config NR_PROTECTION_KEYS > # Everything supports a _single_ key, so allow folks to > # at least call APIs that take keys, but require that the > # key be 0. > + default 16 if X86_INTEL_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS > default 1 What happens if I set that to 42? I think we want to make this a runtime evaluated thingy. If pkeys are compiled in, but the machine does not support it then we don't support 16 keys, or do we? Thanks, tglx -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [PATCH 28/34] x86: wire up mprotect_key() system call Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2015 19:44:59 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: References: <20151204011424.8A36E365@viggo.jf.intel.com> <20151204011503.2A095839@viggo.jf.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20151204011503.2A095839-LXbPSdftPKxrdx17CPfAsdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-api-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Dave Hansen Cc: linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-mm-Bw31MaZKKs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org, x86-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, dave.hansen-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@public.gmane.org, linux-api-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 3 Dec 2015, Dave Hansen wrote: > #include > diff -puN mm/Kconfig~pkeys-16-x86-mprotect_key mm/Kconfig > --- a/mm/Kconfig~pkeys-16-x86-mprotect_key 2015-12-03 16:21:31.114920208 -0800 > +++ b/mm/Kconfig 2015-12-03 16:21:31.119920435 -0800 > @@ -679,4 +679,5 @@ config NR_PROTECTION_KEYS > # Everything supports a _single_ key, so allow folks to > # at least call APIs that take keys, but require that the > # key be 0. > + default 16 if X86_INTEL_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS > default 1 What happens if I set that to 42? I think we want to make this a runtime evaluated thingy. If pkeys are compiled in, but the machine does not support it then we don't support 16 keys, or do we? Thanks, tglx