From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Laura Abbott Subject: Re: [RFC 2/3] arm: mm: Define set_memory_* functions for ARM Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 18:48:28 -0700 Message-ID: <51C10DEC.7030605@codeaurora.org> References: <1371057810-3189-1-git-send-email-lauraa@codeaurora.org> <1371057810-3189-3-git-send-email-lauraa@codeaurora.org> <20130618110959.GB5893@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.11.231]:39824 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932860Ab3FSBs3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Jun 2013 21:48:29 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20130618110959.GB5893@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com> Sender: linux-arm-msm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org To: Will Deacon Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Russell King , Catalin Marinas , Nicoas Pitre , "linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org" On 6/18/2013 4:09 AM, Will Deacon wrote: > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 06:23:29PM +0100, Laura Abbott wrote: >> Other architectures define various set_memory functions to allow >> attributes to be changed (e.g. set_memory_x, set_memory_rw, etc.) >> Currently, these functions are missing on ARM. Define these in an >> appropriate manner for ARM. >> >> Signed-off-by: Laura Abbott >> --- >> arch/arm/include/asm/cacheflush.h | 5 ++ >> arch/arm/mm/mmu.c | 86 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 2 files changed, 91 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/cacheflush.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/cacheflush.h >> index bff7138..55ed26b 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/cacheflush.h >> +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/cacheflush.h >> @@ -438,4 +438,9 @@ static inline void __sync_cache_range_r(volatile void *p, size_t size) >> #define sync_cache_w(ptr) __sync_cache_range_w(ptr, sizeof *(ptr)) >> #define sync_cache_r(ptr) __sync_cache_range_r(ptr, sizeof *(ptr)) >> >> +int set_memory_ro(unsigned long addr, int numpages); >> +int set_memory_rw(unsigned long addr, int numpages); >> +int set_memory_x(unsigned long addr, int numpages); >> +int set_memory_nx(unsigned long addr, int numpages); > > This seems like a pretty clunky interface with a horribly generic name, but > that seems to be what x86 and s390 are using. I wonder if there would be any > interest in tidying it up a bit? It really looks like something that is > x86-specific but has started to grow users in core code (set_memory_4k?!). > I think cleanup would be beneficial. Nothing else really uses the set_memory_* functions and s390 explicitly defined them so they could use CONFIG_DEBUG_SET_MODULE_RONX as well. Perhaps the work I did with apply_to_page_range could apply across all architectures? Thanks, Laura -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation