>>
>>> + * -EAGAIN if a fixup is needed
>>> + * -EINVAL if unsupported notifier bits have been specified
>>> + *
>>> + * Expected to be called with sg->mm->mmap_sem in read and
>>> + * guest_table_lock held.
>>> + */
>>> +static int gmap_protect_pmd(struct gmap *gmap, unsigned long gaddr,
>>> + pmd_t *pmdp, int prot, unsigned long
>>> bits) +{
>>> + int pmd_i = pmd_val(*pmdp) & _SEGMENT_ENTRY_INVALID;
>>> + int pmd_p = pmd_val(*pmdp) & _SEGMENT_ENTRY_PROTECT;
>>> +
>>> + /* Fixup needed */
>>> + if ((pmd_i && (prot != PROT_NONE)) || (pmd_p && (prot ==
>>> PROT_WRITE)))
>>> + return -EAGAIN;
>>
>> You should also return -EINVAL in case !PROT_WRITE is defined, as we
>> only support PROT_WRITE (we don't perform any protection!)
>
> So, you want a temporary check that I have to remove two patches later?
Just stumbled over that myself in the other patch, no you can leave it
out, maybe add a comment to the patch description.
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
