From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Message-ID: <17634.64640.709200.871907@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 21:07:44 +1000 From: Paul Mackerras To: Gabriel Paubert Subject: Re: PowerPC paxtest results w/ gcc-4.1 In-Reply-To: <20060816105925.GB21865@iram.es> References: <17630.27174.711916.643790@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> <000301c6bf97$e9151e00$99dfdfdf@bakuhatsu.net> <17633.18057.778991.483461@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> <20060816105925.GB21865@iram.es> Cc: 'Albert Cahalan' , debian-powerpc@lists.debian.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Gabriel Paubert writes: > I agree, but I don't know why you believe it would cause > a machine check (0x200): from my docs, it is an ISI (0x400). I don't believe it would cause a machine check either, but that is what Matt Sealey was saying. I don't know where he got that idea. > BTW, there is one way to make pages non executable: mark > them as guarded, but it will have a significant cost in > terms of performance. Indeed. I guess we could do that as a config option for machines that really want maximum security at the expense of performance, but I don't think all users would want that. Paul.