[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20151204011429.239073E3@viggo.jf.intel.com>
Date:	Thu, 03 Dec 2015 17:14:29 -0800
From:	Dave Hansen <dave@...1.net>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	linux-mm@...ck.org, x86@...nel.org, Dave Hansen <dave@...1.net>,
	dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com
Subject: [PATCH 03/34] x86, pkeys: Add Kconfig option
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
I don't have a strong opinion on whether we need a Kconfig prompt
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.
Note that, with disabled-features.h, the checks in the code
for protection keys are always the same:
	cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_PKU)
With the config option disabled, this essentially turns into an
#ifdef.
We will hide the prompt for now.
Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
---
 b/arch/x86/Kconfig |    4 ++++
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff -puN arch/x86/Kconfig~pkeys-01-kconfig arch/x86/Kconfig
--- a/arch/x86/Kconfig~pkeys-01-kconfig	2015-12-03 16:21:19.440390755 -0800
+++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig	2015-12-03 16:21:19.444390937 -0800
@@ -1680,6 +1680,10 @@ config X86_INTEL_MPX
 
 	  If unsure, say N.
 
+config X86_INTEL_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS
+	def_bool y
+	depends on CPU_SUP_INTEL && X86_64
+
 config EFI
 	bool "EFI runtime service support"
 	depends on ACPI
_
--
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
 
