linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com>
To: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
	linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: pkeys: Reserve PKEY_DISABLE_READ
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2018 10:09:47 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181109180947.GF5481@ram.oc3035372033.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87bm6z71yw.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com>

On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 09:23:35PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Ram Pai:
> 
> > Florian,
> >
> > 	I can. But I am struggling to understand the requirement. Why is
> > 	this needed?  Are we proposing a enhancement to the sys_pkey_alloc(),
> > 	to be able to allocate keys that are initialied to disable-read
> > 	only?
> 
> Yes, I think that would be a natural consequence.
> 
> However, my immediate need comes from the fact that the AMR register can
> contain a flag combination that is not possible to represent with the
> existing PKEY_DISABLE_WRITE and PKEY_DISABLE_ACCESS flags.  User code
> could write to AMR directly, so I cannot rule out that certain flag
> combinations exist there.
> 
> So I came up with this:
> 
> int
> pkey_get (int key)
> {
>   if (key < 0 || key > PKEY_MAX)
>     {
>       __set_errno (EINVAL);
>       return -1;
>     }
>   unsigned int index = pkey_index (key);
>   unsigned long int amr = pkey_read ();
>   unsigned int bits = (amr >> index) & 3;
> 
>   /* Translate from AMR values.  PKEY_AMR_READ standing alone is not
>      currently representable.  */
>   if (bits & PKEY_AMR_READ)

this should be
   if (bits & (PKEY_AMR_READ|PKEY_AMR_WRITE))


>     return PKEY_DISABLE_ACCESS;


>   else if (bits == PKEY_AMR_WRITE)
>     return PKEY_DISABLE_WRITE;
>   return 0;
> }
> 
> And this is not ideal.  I would prefer something like this instead:
> 
>   switch (bits)
>     {
>       case PKEY_AMR_READ | PKEY_AMR_WRITE:
>         return PKEY_DISABLE_ACCESS;
>       case PKEY_AMR_READ:
>         return PKEY_DISABLE_READ;
>       case PKEY_AMR_WRITE:
>         return PKEY_DISABLE_WRITE;
>       case 0:
>         return 0;
>     }

yes.
 and on x86 it will be something like:
   switch (bits)
     {
       case PKEY_PKRU_ACCESS :
         return PKEY_DISABLE_ACCESS;
       case PKEY_AMR_WRITE:
         return PKEY_DISABLE_WRITE;
       case 0:
         return 0;
     }

But for this to work, why do you need to enhance the sys_pkey_alloc()
interface?  Not that I am against it. Trying to understand if the
enhancement is really needed.

> 
> By the way, is the AMR register 64-bit or 32-bit on 32-bit POWER?

It is 64-bit.

RP

  reply	other threads:[~2018-11-09 18:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-11-08 12:05 pkeys: Reserve PKEY_DISABLE_READ Florian Weimer
2018-11-08 14:57 ` Dave Hansen
2018-11-08 15:01   ` Florian Weimer
2018-11-08 17:14     ` Dave Hansen
2018-11-08 17:37       ` Florian Weimer
2018-11-08 20:12         ` Ram Pai
2018-11-08 20:23           ` Florian Weimer
2018-11-09 18:09             ` Ram Pai [this message]
2018-11-12 12:00               ` Florian Weimer
2018-11-27 10:23                 ` Ram Pai
2018-11-27 11:57                   ` Florian Weimer
2018-11-27 15:31                     ` Dave Hansen
2018-11-29 11:37                       ` Florian Weimer
2018-12-03  4:02                         ` Ram Pai
2018-12-03 15:52                           ` Florian Weimer
2018-12-04  6:23                             ` Ram Pai
2018-12-05 13:00                               ` Florian Weimer
2018-12-05 20:23                                 ` Ram Pai
2018-12-05 16:21                           ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-12-05 20:36                             ` Ram Pai
2018-11-08 20:08       ` Ram Pai
2018-11-08 20:11         ` Dave Hansen
2018-11-08 20:14         ` Florian Weimer
2018-11-08 19:22 ` Ram Pai
2018-11-12 10:29   ` Florian Weimer

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=20181109180947.GF5481@ram.oc3035372033.ibm.com \
    --to=linuxram@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
    --cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.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).