On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 07:49:05PM +1000, Balbir Singh wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 5:55 PM, Ram Pai <linuxram@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 03:26:01PM +1000, Balbir Singh wrote:
> >> On Wed, 5 Jul 2017 14:21:52 -0700
> >> Ram Pai <linuxram@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Implements helper functions to read and write the key related
> >> > registers; AMR, IAMR, UAMOR.
> >> >
> >> > AMR register tracks the read,write permission of a key
> >> > IAMR register tracks the execute permission of a key
> >> > UAMOR register enables and disables a key
> >> >
> >> > Signed-off-by: Ram Pai <linuxram@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> > ---
> >> > arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/pgtable.h | 60 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> > 1 files changed, 60 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >> >
> >> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/pgtable.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/pgtable.h
> >> > index 85bc987..435d6a7 100644
> >> > --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/pgtable.h
> >> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/pgtable.h
> >> > @@ -428,6 +428,66 @@ static inline void huge_ptep_set_wrprotect(struct mm_struct *mm,
> >> > pte_update(mm, addr, ptep, 0, _PAGE_PRIVILEGED, 1);
> >> > }
> >> >
> >> > +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC64_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS
> >> > +
> >> > +#include <asm/reg.h>
> >> > +static inline u64 read_amr(void)
> >> > +{
> >> > + return mfspr(SPRN_AMR);
> >> > +}
> >> > +static inline void write_amr(u64 value)
> >> > +{
> >> > + mtspr(SPRN_AMR, value);
> >> > +}
> >> > +static inline u64 read_iamr(void)
> >> > +{
> >> > + return mfspr(SPRN_IAMR);
> >> > +}
> >> > +static inline void write_iamr(u64 value)
> >> > +{
> >> > + mtspr(SPRN_IAMR, value);
> >> > +}
> >> > +static inline u64 read_uamor(void)
> >> > +{
> >> > + return mfspr(SPRN_UAMOR);
> >> > +}
> >> > +static inline void write_uamor(u64 value)
> >> > +{
> >> > + mtspr(SPRN_UAMOR, value);
> >> > +}
> >> > +
> >> > +#else /* CONFIG_PPC64_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS */
> >> > +
> >> > +static inline u64 read_amr(void)
> >> > +{
> >> > + WARN(1, "%s called with MEMORY PROTECTION KEYS disabled\n", __func__);
> >> > + return -1;
> >> > +}
> >>
> >> Why do we need to have a version here if we are going to WARN(), why not
> >> let the compilation fail if called from outside of CONFIG_PPC64_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS?
> >> Is that the intention?
> >
> > I did not want to stop someone; kernel module for example, from calling
> > these interfaces from outside the pkey domain.
> >
> > Either way can be argued to be correct, I suppose.
>
> Nope, build failures are better than run time failures, otherwise the
> kernel will split its guts warning and warning here.
>
Well these are helper functions that can be called by anyone under
any situation. I will rather have them defined unconditionally; under
no ifdefs. No spewing of warnings anymore. The registers will
be read or written as told. It just makes sense that way.
RP
--
Ram Pai
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
