[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFzJ+cXgezVu_wU462wCp=pDO_O=M6ShbxJjcuXUNRwEJQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2015 13:09:58 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: Re: Rethinking sigcontext's xfeatures slightly for PKRU's benefit?
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 1:04 PM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> I do wonder if you need an explicit value, though. I think it's
> reasonable to say that PKRU value 0 is special. It's what we'd start
> processes with, and why not just say that it's what we run signal
> handlers in?
>
> Would any other value ever make sense, really?
Ahh. Your point about the PROT_EXEC handling means that maybe we don't
want to default to zero. Maybe we want to make the default PKRU
startup value be 1 instead, enabling access disable key for key 0?
Linus
--
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