Re: [PATCH v2] sparc64: Add support for Application Data Integrity (ADI)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



From: Khalid Aziz <khalid.aziz@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 14:27:09 -0700

> I agree with your point of view. PSTATE.mcde and TTE.mcd are set in
> response to request from userspace. If userspace asked for them to be
> set, they already know but it was the database guys that asked for
> these two functions and they are the primary customers for the ADI
> feature. I am not crazy about this idea since this extends the
> mprotect API even further but would you consider using the return
> value from mprotect to indicate if PSTATE.mcde or TTE.mcd were already
> set on the given address?

Well, that's the idea.

If the mprotect using MAP_ADI or whatever succeeds, then ADI is
enabled.

Users can thus also pass MAP_ADI as a flag to mmap() to get ADI
protection from the very beginning.
--
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



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Newbies]     [x86 Platform Driver]     [Netdev]     [Linux Wireless]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux Filesystems]     [Yosemite Discussion]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux