Russell Currey <rus...@russell.cc> a écrit :
On Fri, 2018-10-26 at 18:35 +0200, LEROY Christophe wrote:
Why not call our new functionnality SMAP instead of calling it GUAP ?
mpe wasn't a fan of using the same terminology as other architectures.
I don't like too much the word 'guarded' because it means something
different for powerpc MMUs.
What about something like 'user space access protection' ?
Christophe
Having a separate term does avoid some assumptions about how things
work or are implemented, but sharing compatibility with an existing
parameter is nice.
Personally I don't really care too much about the name.
- Russell
Christophe
Russell Currey <rus...@russell.cc> a écrit :
> Signed-off-by: Russell Currey <rus...@russell.cc>
> ---
> Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
> b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
> index a5ad67d5cb16..8f78e75965f0 100644
> --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
> @@ -2764,7 +2764,7 @@
> noexec=on: enable non-executable mappings
> (default)
> noexec=off: disable non-executable mappings
>
> - nosmap [X86]
> + nosmap [X86,PPC]
> Disable SMAP (Supervisor Mode Access
> Prevention)
> even if it is supported by processor.
>
> --
> 2.19.1
