On Thu 2022-02-03 18:01 +0000, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> I have another comment: I think patch 5 should be dropped.
Fair enough.
> Having something behave based on a CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SOMETHING item is
> wrong. It is not because a plateform selects
> CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_STRICT_MODULE_RWX that the module core should behave
> differentely than with other platforms as far as the user has not
> selected CONFIG_STRICT_MODULE_RWX.
>
> And the topic here is wrong. It is a coincidence if making that stuff
> depend on CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_STRICT_MODULE_RWX works. This is just because
> the only architectures that do the module allocation without Exec flag
> are architectures that have also selected
> CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_STRICT_MODULE_RWX. But it should also work on other
> architectures.
>
> I don't know exactly what was the motivation for commit 93651f80dcb6
> ("modules: fix compile error if don't have strict module rwx") at the
> first place but it is just wrong and we should fix it.
>
> module_enable_x() should work just fine regardless of
> CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_STRICT_MODULE_RWX.
The above does make sense, to me.
Kind regards,
--
Aaron Tomlin
