From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85A05C4167D for ; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 06:56:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id BF8FD6B0072; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 01:56:17 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id B81836B0073; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 01:56:17 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id A23956B0074; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 01:56:17 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0016.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.16]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FF7F6B0072 for ; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 01:56:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin03.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54A35A0B06 for ; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 06:56:17 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 80112994794.03.C11F176 Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) by imf25.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B22E8A000B for ; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 06:56:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 2DA1268AFE; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 07:55:12 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2022 07:55:12 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Aaron Lu Cc: Mike Rapoport , Song Liu , bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, x86@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, hch@lst.de, rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com, mcgrof@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/5] execmem_alloc for BPF programs Message-ID: <20221109065512.GA11254@lst.de> References: <20221107223921.3451913-1-song@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1667976972; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=XEJjlxdpykMPQxdrxtRsqFLSH00tXGHHx/YToOE4AlU=; b=3cwk0M6VxhDOlYd1526hJqE7bWkR3cFuPobYOkZJAccqPnDOtL3+afuI8VLH8jsghMcl/d 6g7x8+Q7zjrymbVmB5qenJuSSVg2FO+jgDBWyOQ8twGlnqkSHuN3URCLJSf4UczAUHBsmV CpV1Ymyy3FQbZvWs9g/ZagCmIEAdOaI= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf25.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=none (imf25.hostedemail.com: domain of hch@lst.de has no SPF policy when checking 213.95.11.211) smtp.mailfrom=hch@lst.de ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1667976972; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=7fKNonQ0+6qhXByThdiuYUdGpU+01Zez/gpoxKGPkdz7QcRcC19GBTzsnffDN90pjSo805 GHZxE/DXMqBm+kDN365UfxIN2WgshQYDQK8wlPkuxgZU3mGlQlRnRMeN71L7b3ApRdWnmr y4Oc/O5AVY/QZSNchaRakJSPedqfGhM= X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: B22E8A000B Authentication-Results: imf25.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=none (imf25.hostedemail.com: domain of hch@lst.de has no SPF policy when checking 213.95.11.211) smtp.mailfrom=hch@lst.de X-Rspamd-Server: rspam10 X-Rspam-User: X-Stat-Signature: 1qkwcyjtn5e4gxbixnhp5jq8ey51tsgz X-HE-Tag: 1667976971-32720 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000055, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Tue, Nov 08, 2022 at 08:38:32PM +0800, Aaron Lu wrote: > set_memory_nx/x() on a vmalloced range will not affect direct map but > set_memory_ro/rw() will. Which seems a little odd. Is there any good reason to not also propagate the NX bit?