Re: [PATCH v11 00/10] Application Data Integrity feature introduced by SPARC M7

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

 



Khalid Aziz <khalid.aziz@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> V11 changes:
> This series is same as v10 and was simply rebased on 4.15 kernel. Can
> mm maintainers please review patches 2, 7, 8 and 9 which are arch
> independent, and include/linux/mm.h and mm/ksm.c changes in patch 10
> and ack these if everything looks good?

I am a bit puzzled how this differs from the pkey's that other
architectures are implementing to achieve a similar result.

I am a bit mystified why you don't store the tag in a vma
instead of inventing a new way to store data on page out.

Can you please use force_sig_fault to send these signals instead
of force_sig_info.  Emperically I have found that it is very
error prone to generate siginfo's by hand, especially on code
paths where several different si_codes may apply.  So it helps
to go through a helper function to ensure the fiddly bits are
all correct.  AKA the unused bits all need to be set to zero before
struct siginfo is copied to userspace.

Eric

--
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



[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux FS]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Resources]

  Powered by Linux