From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 E970D208BA for ; Sat, 6 Jul 2024 23:26:17 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1720308378; cv=none; b=S37c8bxRvex7nC6osA9u9360Xxt+sVMw/sovKXBFLxzcH5yqTsGIV0yxUbu7iDLW/RCBhS/1z9ZJ61duNiD/unEPu/l+CMJJow9INn8dFip3M2BlsYW3JSB1e7prxyTbe47P5SW2Vhj8Dxsn+WiG5/N00Ajn+YYUJHbGcAGyOhg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1720308378; c=relaxed/simple; bh=sX1BZ9AgLzzn2az8RZNnCqCxvpTqfrEHESYZ0g452wc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=ASpuLJ0AkxGMhX7HmUalAfrizb3L7ZxxfjR/4RnG+vPX/nxxbLUGS8i7RjIxS0BQ3b22bbr1762tIJaKNUgF+TzSy9HJxZzoSTwWVxc+bqFsFSjXQxXII4jewORSJM2UbYpATXIZ/7PNVfPzoY0PKftkLZbo+ywy3jUvNmQ8WDw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=zx2c4.com header.i=@zx2c4.com header.b=QEbND5Cu; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=zx2c4.com header.i=@zx2c4.com header.b="QEbND5Cu" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A5D7CC2BD10; Sat, 6 Jul 2024 23:26:16 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=zx2c4.com header.i=@zx2c4.com header.b="QEbND5Cu" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zx2c4.com; s=20210105; t=1720308374; 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=B83bxoRfCAFI+JIVmqyQu1wlzNm60i+mjr8CbGA6YZQ=; b=QEbND5CuTCLZriPzVNm1RGqIA0vL8EYv78qcqkQKXYH+AWuozIjAWaIfnKYj/G04vOgT8K /5MaAnvLrm1o2MdQoB/SEBZPoNKyPs3JmhuWYXI8bKbeyaudvl5VB0sdHrOydkuZiNHecM thxPbWnU3sR3+mO9lQH2i+bhrIdyy8o= Received: by mail.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTPSA id a7c61a4f (TLSv1.3:TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256:NO); Sat, 6 Jul 2024 23:26:13 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2024 01:26:11 +0200 From: "Jason A. Donenfeld" To: Linus Torvalds Cc: jolsa@kernel.org, mhiramat@kernel.org, cgzones@googlemail.com, brauner@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de Subject: Re: deconflicting new syscall numbers for 6.11 Message-ID: References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Hi Linus, On Fri, Jul 05, 2024 at 07:56:03PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Fri, 5 Jul 2024 at 19:10, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > > > > https://git.zx2c4.com/linux-rng/log/ > > So we already expose VM_WIPEONFORK and VM_DONTDUMP using madvise(). > Exposing them at mmap creation time with MMAP_xyz sounds fine. > > However, I do note that both the pre-existing VM_WIPEONFORK - and the > new VM_DROPPABLE - needs to be limited to anonymous private mappings > only. > > You did that for VM_DROPPABLE, but not for VM_WIPEONFORK. Good catch, thanks. I'll look over all of that again closely too. > Anyway, that patch looks largely fine to me apart from that note, but > I do think you want to check it with the mm people on linux-mm. They'll certainly be on the list of recipients for the v+1 series when I post it (hopefully shortly). > > The selftest code is the largest part of it. There's no more syscall. I > > think it should be much more to your liking and seems like an alright > > set of compromises. Hopefully that's a bit closer to the mark. > > From a "look through the patches" standpoint, this did look more > palatable to me, but I also would have had an easier time with looking > at the patches if the self-tests were separate commits. Okay, will do. I think you've got some selftest makefile fixes from John/Shuah that'll be sent your way if they haven't already for 6.10 that I'll rebase on so that there isn't an annoying merge conflict. https://lore.kernel.org/all/d99a1e3b-1893-4fac-bf05-bcb60ca7f89c@linuxfoundation.org/ Jason