From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 91F0B2DF13A for ; Fri, 17 Jul 2026 10:46:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1784285201; cv=none; b=MWzNo/InjLUTZKzJrg5OPc0bCIlzVgT8Kka4zx7E0/JzV5gFEk7qbHkiLwkZQhiXCqVPN5EY3CK9KOZbIYuHl3AOR5uXC4E0+ZsUd6r0KjDx6ybwU2kioEj5dsjgi8w2HpUnIRi9/3edXqdM2BhS/N3wQhidyj+fhWYrqJMHVdw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1784285201; c=relaxed/simple; bh=oq+S5cal5K9L1zGnDiuDaLahmqZtQ96pZ7eM5zZpb2k=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=tXjnW3AicSTqHPU4+rYhXhkeXfwRCUA2Kf1dJO94OLE8q8/gUS7nw7vO0TgIBkVCOfwYljPOCSrLUf247r73/6Rch4xIfx2kYciE9PV00WRQ+vWRouVZGCXp6LuACR6Tl6wwc0MQBAGRpg5An0Q3KKgVFFU8IPRBYFMd4t6wdzY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=CbDeLus9; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=LGR0wwBE; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="CbDeLus9"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="LGR0wwBE" From: Nam Cao DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1784285198; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=YevZp+WcXO8LGuz5eOqbM+91Ij2ZiExSH2hvsBOZsvo=; b=CbDeLus9tQ5f58r9WNDzhDdf+9Lvn/3BblELdhk0v7g/2KZkvcIHBb8unaK8BA43aCm9ja Ux46yaKXOP+YZxcq7hSfg1hINtZOFiFVtoz6FTc2LuxiUm26e45gAeu1VTln53bTygV8Mi Ab67kZy5albKUk1C7k7l8c4hcjF18Bi9yE6eV7voIX+S4RmqYWVfd/5cw29DyOCLq8gNnx QJHZIN0vWZ8ZnIbeNICvXk44vVMSL92yQe3RjPgctKGYqt1v+CcbRuA3dlM+iU7uYINGHz 1mx19BoCmdKITGG4Emf0LopMy87OetRPH8mw/GcUFishAwG2Q3SyOT9RLFzNcw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1784285198; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=YevZp+WcXO8LGuz5eOqbM+91Ij2ZiExSH2hvsBOZsvo=; b=LGR0wwBE4hTM1zArP3dS7gIrSbjSeJwS9jX8IZYpLdZGp6KxpJHNBsePtHP0cHV0H53Kx3 zlZ3YHVFoBXY/cDQ== To: Xiaofeng Yuan , Paul Walmsley , Palmer Dabbelt , Albert Ou Cc: Alexandre Ghiti , Mark Brown , linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xiaofengmian@163.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] riscv: mm: make EXECMEM_KPROBES writable without ARCH_HAS_EXECMEM_ROX In-Reply-To: <20260701102822.95459-2-xiaofengmian@163.com> References: <20260701102822.95459-1-xiaofengmian@163.com> <20260701102822.95459-2-xiaofengmian@163.com> Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2026 12:46:37 +0200 Message-ID: <87v7adx59u.fsf@yellow.woof> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Xiaofeng Yuan writes: > diff --git a/arch/riscv/mm/init.c b/arch/riscv/mm/init.c > index 5b1b3c88b..21794e7bb 100644 > --- a/arch/riscv/mm/init.c > +++ b/arch/riscv/mm/init.c > @@ -1457,7 +1457,9 @@ struct execmem_info __init *execmem_arch_setup(void) > [EXECMEM_KPROBES] = { > .start = VMALLOC_START, > .end = VMALLOC_END, > - .pgprot = PAGE_KERNEL_READ_EXEC, > + .pgprot = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_EXECMEM_ROX) ? > + PAGE_KERNEL_READ_EXEC : > + PAGE_KERNEL_EXEC, > .alignment = 1, > }, > [EXECMEM_BPF] = { CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_EXECMEM_ROX=n for RISC-V, so this is just .pgprot = PAGE_KERNEL_EXEC, Since this is only needed when CONFIG_STRICT_MODULE_RWX=n, shouldn't the condition be based on that instead? Nam