On 04/06/2018 06:09 PM, Ram Pai wrote: > Well :). my point is add this code and delete the other > code that you add later in that function. I don't think I'm understanding what your suggestion was. I looked at the code and I honestly do not think I can remove any of it. For the plain (non-explicit pkey_mprotect()) case, there are exactly four paths through __arch_override_mprotect_pkey(), resulting in three different results. 1. New prot==PROT_EXEC, no pkey-exec support -> do not override 2. New prot!=PROT_EXEC, old VMA not PROT_EXEC-> do not override 3. New prot==PROT_EXEC, w/ pkey-exec support -> override to exec pkey 4. New prot!=PROT_EXEC, old VMA is PROT_EXEC -> override to default I don't see any redundancy there, or any code that we can eliminate or simplify. It was simpler before, but that's what where bug was.
