From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Received: from mga17.intel.com (mga17.intel.com [192.55.52.151])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 40dGTT4DzGzDrLk
 for <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>; Sat,  5 May 2018 14:42:46 +1000 (AEST)
Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 3/3] mm, powerpc, x86: introduce an additional vma bit
 for powerpc pkey
To: Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com>
References: <1525471183-21277-1-git-send-email-linuxram@us.ibm.com>
 <1525471183-21277-3-git-send-email-linuxram@us.ibm.com>
 <1e37895e-5a18-11c1-58f1-834f96dfd4d5@intel.com>
 <20180505011243.GB5617@ram.oc3035372033.ibm.com>
Cc: mpe@ellerman.id.au, mingo@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
 linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, x86@kernel.org,
 linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
 benh@kernel.crashing.org, paulus@samba.org, khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
 aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, bsingharora@gmail.com, hbabu@us.ibm.com,
 mhocko@kernel.org, bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com, ebiederm@xmission.com,
 corbet@lwn.net, arnd@arndb.de
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Message-ID: <7d1de723-f001-ebbe-6026-91bef88c566d@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 21:42:39 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20180505011243.GB5617@ram.oc3035372033.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/options/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>

On 05/04/2018 06:12 PM, Ram Pai wrote:
>> That new line boils down to:
>>
>> 		[ilog2(0)]	= "",
>>
>> on x86.  It wasn't *obvious* to me that it is OK to do that.  The other
>> possibly undefined bits (VM_SOFTDIRTY for instance) #ifdef themselves
>> out of this array.
>>
>> I would just be a wee bit worried that this would overwrite the 0 entry
>> ("??") with "".
> Yes it would :-( and could potentially break anything that depends on
> 0th entry being "??"
> 
> Is the following fix acceptable?
> 
> #if VM_PKEY_BIT4
>                 [ilog2(VM_PKEY_BIT4)]   = "",
> #endif

Yep, I think that works for me.