On 09/22/2012 04:32 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * H. Peter Anvin <h...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
>> On 09/21/2012 03:08 PM, Dave Jones wrote:
>>>
>>> Perhaps add a printk somewhere to show that it's actually been enabled
>>> maybe ?
>>>
>>> Also, would it be feasible to add something like we have for test_nx ?
>>> If this feature regresses in some way in the future, I suspect we'd like
>>> to know about it sooner rather than later.
>>
>> Good idea... should add this both for SMEP and SMAP.
>
> Very much agreed - these exploit preventation hardware features
> are really useful, and it's good to inform the user that they
> are active.
>
I was thinking about this, do you think a printk would be better, or a
new field in /proc/cpuinfo?
-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
