From: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
To: Dave Jones <davej@codemonkey.org.uk>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Dave Hansen <dave@sr71.net>,
mgorman@techsingularity.net, arnd@arndb.de,
linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, luto@kernel.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: pkeys: Remove easily triggered WARN
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2016 09:54:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161017075429.GB3511@osiris> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161017071648.GA3511@osiris>
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 09:16:48AM +0200, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 02:26:24PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> > This easy-to-trigger warning shows up instantly when running
> > Trinity on a kernel with CONFIG_X86_INTEL_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS disabled.
> >
> > At most this should have been a printk, but the -EINVAL alone should be more
> > than adequate indicator that something isn't available.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Dave Jones <davej@codemonkey.org.uk>
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/pkeys.h b/include/linux/pkeys.h
> > index e4c08c1ff0c5..a1bacf1150b2 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/pkeys.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/pkeys.h
> > @@ -25,7 +25,6 @@ static inline int mm_pkey_alloc(struct mm_struct *mm)
> >
> > static inline int mm_pkey_free(struct mm_struct *mm, int pkey)
> > {
> > - WARN_ONCE(1, "free of protection key when disabled");
> > return -EINVAL;
> > }
>
> FWIW, are all architectures supposed to wire these new system calls up?
>
> I decided to ignore these on s390 since we can't make any sane use of
> them. However mips has them already wired up.
>
> The only difference on s390 (and any other architecture without memory
> protection keys with x86 like semantics) would be that pkey_alloc/pkey_free
> will return -EINVAL instead of -ENOSYS and that we have a new mprotect
> wrapper called pkey_mprotect, if being called with a pkey parameter of -1.
What I wrote is of course not correct...
There can't be any -ENOSYS if the system call isn't wired up, since the
system call number hasn't been allocated at all for an architecture.
But the question remains: should these be wired up on all architectures?
--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-10-17 7:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-10-14 18:26 pkeys: Remove easily triggered WARN Dave Jones
2016-10-14 19:16 ` Dave Hansen
2016-10-17 7:16 ` Heiko Carstens
2016-10-17 7:54 ` Heiko Carstens [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20161017075429.GB3511@osiris \
--to=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dave@sr71.net \
--cc=davej@codemonkey.org.uk \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).