On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 08:21:02AM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > On Dec 2, 2018, at 8:02 PM, Ram Pai wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 12:37:15PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> >> * Dave Hansen:
> >>
> On 11/27/18 3:57 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> I would have expected something
On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 02:00:59PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Ram Pai:
>
> > Ok. here is a patch, compiled but not tested. See if this meets the
> > specifications.
> >
> > ---
> >
> > commit 3dc06e73f3795921265d
> On Dec 2, 2018, at 8:02 PM, Ram Pai wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 12:37:15PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Dave Hansen:
>>
On 11/27/18 3:57 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
I would have expected something that translates PKEY_DISABLE_WRITE |
PKEY_DISABLE_READ into PKEY_DISABLE_
* Ram Pai:
> Ok. here is a patch, compiled but not tested. See if this meets the
> specifications.
>
> ---
>
> commit 3dc06e73f3795921265d5d1d935e428deab01616
> Author: Ram Pai
> Date: Tue Dec 4 00:04:11 2018 -0500
On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 04:52:02PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Ram Pai:
>
> > So the problem is as follows:
> >
> > Currently the kernel supports 'disable-write' and 'disable-access'.
> >
> > On x86, cpu supports 'disable-write' and 'disable-access'. This
> > matches with what the kernel su
* Ram Pai:
> So the problem is as follows:
>
> Currently the kernel supports 'disable-write' and 'disable-access'.
>
> On x86, cpu supports 'disable-write' and 'disable-access'. This
> matches with what the kernel supports. All good.
>
> However on power, cpu supports 'disable-read' too. Since u
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 12:37:15PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Dave Hansen:
>
> > On 11/27/18 3:57 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> >> I would have expected something that translates PKEY_DISABLE_WRITE |
> >> PKEY_DISABLE_READ into PKEY_DISABLE_ACCESS, and also accepts
> >> PKEY_DISABLE_ACCESS | P
* Dave Hansen:
> On 11/27/18 3:57 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> I would have expected something that translates PKEY_DISABLE_WRITE |
>> PKEY_DISABLE_READ into PKEY_DISABLE_ACCESS, and also accepts
>> PKEY_DISABLE_ACCESS | PKEY_DISABLE_READ, for consistency with POWER.
>>
>> (My understanding is th
On 11/27/18 3:57 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> I would have expected something that translates PKEY_DISABLE_WRITE |
> PKEY_DISABLE_READ into PKEY_DISABLE_ACCESS, and also accepts
> PKEY_DISABLE_ACCESS | PKEY_DISABLE_READ, for consistency with POWER.
>
> (My understanding is that PKEY_DISABLE_ACCESS
* Ram Pai:
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/mman.h
> b/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/mman.h
> index d4a8d04..e9b121b 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/mman.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/mman.h
> @@ -24,6 +24,11 @@
> ((key) & 0x2 ? VM_PKEY_BIT1 : 0) | \
>
On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 01:00:19PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Ram Pai:
>
> > On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 09:23:35PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> >> * Ram Pai:
> >>
> >> > Florian,
> >> >
> >> > I can. But I am struggling to understand the requirement. Why is
> >> > this needed? Are we prop
* Ram Pai:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 09:23:35PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Ram Pai:
>>
>> > Florian,
>> >
>> >I can. But I am struggling to understand the requirement. Why is
>> >this needed? Are we proposing a enhancement to the sys_pkey_alloc(),
>> >to be able to allocate ke
* Ram Pai:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 01:05:09PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> Would it be possible to reserve a bit for PKEY_DISABLE_READ?
>>
>> I think the POWER implementation can disable read access at the hardware
>> level, but not write access, and that cannot be expressed with the
>> curr
On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 09:23:35PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Ram Pai:
>
> > Florian,
> >
> > I can. But I am struggling to understand the requirement. Why is
> > this needed? Are we proposing a enhancement to the sys_pkey_alloc(),
> > to be able to allocate keys that are initia
* Ram Pai:
> Florian,
>
> I can. But I am struggling to understand the requirement. Why is
> this needed? Are we proposing a enhancement to the sys_pkey_alloc(),
> to be able to allocate keys that are initialied to disable-read
> only?
Yes, I think that would be a natural
On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 06:37:41PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Dave Hansen:
>
> > On 11/8/18 7:01 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> >> Ideally, PKEY_DISABLE_READ | PKEY_DISABLE_WRITE and PKEY_DISABLE_READ |
> >> PKEY_DISABLE_ACCESS would be treated as PKEY_DISABLE_ACCESS both, and a
> >> line PKEY_
On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 01:05:09PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> Would it be possible to reserve a bit for PKEY_DISABLE_READ?
>
> I think the POWER implementation can disable read access at the hardware
> level, but not write access, and that cannot be expressed with the
> current PKEY_DISABLE_AC
17 matches
Mail list logo