Ram Pai <linuxram@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> @@ -113,10 +117,14 @@ static inline int arch_override_mprotect_pkey(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> return 0;
> }
>
> +extern int __arch_set_user_pkey_access(struct task_struct *tsk, int pkey,
> + unsigned long init_val);
> static inline int arch_set_user_pkey_access(struct task_struct *tsk, int pkey,
> unsigned long init_val)
> {
> - return 0;
> + if (!pkey_inited)
> + return -1;
> + return __arch_set_user_pkey_access(tsk, pkey, init_val);
> }
If non-zero, the return value of this function will be passed to
userspace by the pkey_alloc syscall. Shouldn't it be returning an errno
macro such as -EPERM?
Also, why are there both arch_set_user_pkey_access and
__arch_set_user_pkey_access? Is it a speed optimization so that the
early return is inlined into the caller? Ditto for execute_only_pkey
and __arch_override_mprotect_pkey.
--
Thiago Jung Bauermann
IBM Linux Technology Center
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
