On 5/3/24 18:31, Joey Gouly wrote: > We do not want take POE into account when clearing the MTE tags. > > Signed-off-by: Joey Gouly <joey.gouly@xxxxxxx> > Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx> > Cc: Will Deacon <will@xxxxxxxxxx> Reviewed-by: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@xxxxxxx> > --- > arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h | 11 +++++++---- > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h > index 5c970a9cca67..2449e4e27ea6 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h > @@ -160,8 +160,10 @@ static inline pteval_t __phys_to_pte_val(phys_addr_t phys) > * not set) must return false. PROT_NONE mappings do not have the > * PTE_VALID bit set. > */ > -#define pte_access_permitted(pte, write) \ > +#define pte_access_permitted_no_overlay(pte, write) \ > (((pte_val(pte) & (PTE_VALID | PTE_USER)) == (PTE_VALID | PTE_USER)) && (!(write) || pte_write(pte))) > +#define pte_access_permitted(pte, write) \ > + pte_access_permitted_no_overlay(pte, write) > #define pmd_access_permitted(pmd, write) \ > (pte_access_permitted(pmd_pte(pmd), (write))) > #define pud_access_permitted(pud, write) \ > @@ -348,10 +350,11 @@ static inline void __sync_cache_and_tags(pte_t pte, unsigned int nr_pages) > /* > * If the PTE would provide user space access to the tags associated > * with it then ensure that the MTE tags are synchronised. Although > - * pte_access_permitted() returns false for exec only mappings, they > - * don't expose tags (instruction fetches don't check tags). > + * pte_access_permitted_no_overlay() returns false for exec only > + * mappings, they don't expose tags (instruction fetches don't check > + * tags). > */ > - if (system_supports_mte() && pte_access_permitted(pte, false) && > + if (system_supports_mte() && pte_access_permitted_no_overlay(pte, false) && > !pte_special(pte) && pte_tagged(pte)) > mte_sync_tags(pte, nr_pages); > }
