Re: [PATCH Part2 v5 07/45] x86/traps: Define RMP violation #PF error code

Borislav Petkov
2021-09-29T17:25:29Z

On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 10:58:40AM -0500, Brijesh Singh wrote:
> enum x86_pf_error_code {
> - X86_PF_PROT = 1 << 0,
> - X86_PF_WRITE = 1 << 1,
> - X86_PF_USER = 1 << 2,
> - X86_PF_RSVD = 1 << 3,
> - X86_PF_INSTR = 1 << 4,
> - X86_PF_PK = 1 << 5,
> - X86_PF_SGX = 1 << 15,
> + X86_PF_PROT = BIT_ULL(0),
> + X86_PF_WRITE = BIT_ULL(1),
> + X86_PF_USER = BIT_ULL(2),
> + X86_PF_RSVD = BIT_ULL(3),
> + X86_PF_INSTR = BIT_ULL(4),
> + X86_PF_PK = BIT_ULL(5),
> + X86_PF_SGX = BIT_ULL(15),
> + X86_PF_RMP = BIT_ULL(31),

Those are tested against error_code mostly, which is unsigned long so it
looks like you wanna use _BITUL() here. Not that it matters on x86-64
but if we want to be precise...

--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.