From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759683AbbIVUVG (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Sep 2015 16:21:06 -0400 Received: from www.sr71.net ([198.145.64.142]:41781 "EHLO blackbird.sr71.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759657AbbIVUVE (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Sep 2015 16:21:04 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/26] x86, pkeys: notify userspace about protection key faults To: Thomas Gleixner References: <20150916174903.E112E464@viggo.jf.intel.com> <20150916174906.51062FBC@viggo.jf.intel.com> Cc: x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org From: Dave Hansen Message-ID: <5601B82F.6070601@sr71.net> Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 13:21:03 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 09/22/2015 01:03 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Wed, 16 Sep 2015, Dave Hansen wrote: >> >> +static inline u16 vma_pkey(struct vm_area_struct *vma) >> +{ >> + u16 pkey = 0; >> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_INTEL_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS >> + unsigned long f = vma->vm_flags; >> + pkey |= (!!(f & VM_HIGH_ARCH_0)) << 0; >> + pkey |= (!!(f & VM_HIGH_ARCH_1)) << 1; >> + pkey |= (!!(f & VM_HIGH_ARCH_2)) << 2; >> + pkey |= (!!(f & VM_HIGH_ARCH_3)) << 3; > > Eew. What's wrong with: > > pkey = (vma->vm_flags & VM_PKEY_MASK) >> VM_PKEY_SHIFT; I didn't do that only because we don't have any other need for VM_PKEY_MASK or VM_PKEY_SHIFT. We could do: #define VM_PKEY_MASK (VM_PKEY_BIT0 | VM_PKEY_BIT1 | VM_PKEY_BIT2...) static inline u16 vma_pkey(struct vm_area_struct *vma) { int vm_pkey_shift = __ffs(VM_PKEY_MASK) return (vma->vm_flags & VM_PKEY_MASK) >> vm_pkey_shift; } That's probably the same number of lines of code in the end. The compiler _probably_ ends up doing the same thing either way. >> +static u16 fetch_pkey(unsigned long address, struct task_struct *tsk) > > So here we get a u16 and assign it to si_pkey > >> + if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_OSPKE) && si_code == SEGV_PKUERR) >> + info.si_pkey = fetch_pkey(address, tsk); > > which is int. > >> + int _pkey; /* FIXME: protection key value?? > > Inconsistent at least. So I defined all the kernel-internal types as u16 since I *know* the size of the hardware. The user-exposed ones should probably be a bit more generic. I did just realize that this is an int and my proposed syscall is a long. That I definitely need to make consistent. Does anybody care whether it's an int or a long?