Re: [PATCH V8 33/44] memremap_pages: Introduce pgmap_protection_available()

Ira Weiny
2022-02-28T16:59:49Z

On Fri, Feb 04, 2022 at 08:19:43AM -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 9:55 AM <ira.weiny@intel.com> wrote:

[snip]

> > @@ -63,6 +64,16 @@ static void devmap_managed_enable_put(struct dev_pagemap *pgmap)
> > }
> > #endif /* CONFIG_DEV_PAGEMAP_OPS */
> >
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_DEVMAP_ACCESS_PROTECTION
> > +
> > +bool pgmap_protection_available(void)
> > +{
> > + return pks_available();
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pgmap_protection_available);
>
> Any reason this was chosen to be an out-of-line function? Doesn't this
> defeat the performance advantages of static_cpu_has()?

Unfortunately, yes. pkeys.h includes mm.h which means I can't include pkeys.h
here in mm.h.

Let me see what I can do. In patch 11 I created pks-keys.h. Let me see if I
can leverage that header instead of pkeys.h.

When I created that header I was thinking that the user and supervisor pkey
functions may need even more separation in the headers but I was fearful of
putting too much in pks-keys.h because it was created to avoid conflicts in
asm/processor.h. Looking at it again I think pks_available() may be ok in
pks-keys.h.

Ira

>
> > +
> > +#endif /* CONFIG_DEVMAP_ACCESS_PROTECTION */
> > +
> > static void pgmap_array_delete(struct range *range)
> > {
> > xa_store_range(&pgmap_array, PHYS_PFN(range->start), PHYS_PFN(range->end),
> > --
> > 2.31.1
> >