* Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 9:12 AM, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 12:12 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> * Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >>> Let all the archs that implement CONFIG_STRICT_DEVM use a common > >>> definition in lib/Kconfig.debug. > >> > >> For the x86 bit: > >> > >> Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> > >>> Note, the 'depends on !SPARC' is due to sparc not implementing > >>> devmem_is_allowed(). > >> > >> Maybe that should be converted into a helper Kconfig switch for architectures to > >> opt in to /dev/mem restrictions? > > > > Sure, easy enough to add a ARCH_HAS_DEVMEM_IS_ALLOWED opt-in. > > Is there some hidden meaning about the difference between ARCH_HAS_... > and HAVE_ARCH_... and HAVE_... ? There's also the double underscore variants such as __HAVE_ARCH_STRNCASECMP! ;-) It's all just nonsensical historic muck: because no-one ever was confronted with the messy global picture. Today you can run Documentation/features/list-arch.sh and wonder at the zoo of options ;-) Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
