[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20150928191824.B9C1E342@viggo.jf.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 12:18:24 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave@...1.net>
To: dave@...1.net
Cc: borntraeger@...ibm.com, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com
Subject: [PATCH 19/25] x86, pkeys: add Kconfig prompt to existing config option
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
I don't have a strong opinion on whether we need this or not.
Protection Keys has relatively little code associated with it,
and it is not a heavyweight feature to keep enabled. However,
I can imagine that folks would still appreciate being able to
disable it.
Here's the option if folks want it.
Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
---
b/arch/x86/Kconfig | 10 ++++++++++
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
diff -puN arch/x86/Kconfig~pkeys-40-kconfig-prompt arch/x86/Kconfig
--- a/arch/x86/Kconfig~pkeys-40-kconfig-prompt 2015-09-28 11:39:49.547346582 -0700
+++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig 2015-09-28 11:39:49.551346764 -0700
@@ -1696,8 +1696,18 @@ config X86_INTEL_MPX
If unsure, say N.
config X86_INTEL_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS
+ prompt "Intel Memory Protection Keys"
def_bool y
+ # Note: only available in 64-bit mode
depends on CPU_SUP_INTEL && X86_64
+ ---help---
+ Memory Protection Keys provides a mechanism for enforcing
+ page-based protections, but without requiring modification of the
+ page tables when an application changes protection domains.
+
+ For details, see Documentation/x86/protection-keys.txt
+
+ If unsure, say y.
config EFI
bool "EFI runtime service support"
_
--
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