[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101012115639.GB20436@basil.fritz.box>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 13:56:39 +0200
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli@...il.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Embedded <linux-embedded@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Tim Bird <tim.bird@...sony.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 14(16] pramfs: memory protection
> per-arch?! Wow. Mmm...maybe I have to change something at fs level to
> avoid that. An alternative could be to use the follow_pte solution but
> avoid the protection via Kconfig if the fs is used on some archs (ia64
> or MIPS), with large pages and so on. An help of the kernel community
> to know all these particular cases is welcome.
It depends if the protection is a fundamental part of your design
(but if it is I would argue that's broken because it's really not very good
protection): If it's just an optional nice to have you can stub
it out on architectures that don't support it.
-Andi
--
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists