linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v5 34/38] procfs: display the protection-key number associated with a vma

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 10 Jul 2017 08:37:28 +0530
From:   Anshuman Khandual <khandual@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:     Ram Pai <linuxram@...ibm.com>, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, x86@...nel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     benh@...nel.crashing.org, paulus@...ba.org, mpe@...erman.id.au,
        khandual@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
        bsingharora@...il.com, dave.hansen@...el.com, hbabu@...ibm.com,
        arnd@...db.de, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, corbet@....net,
        mingo@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC v5 34/38] procfs: display the protection-key number
 associated with a vma

On 07/06/2017 02:52 AM, Ram Pai wrote:
> Display the pkey number associated with the vma in smaps of a task.
> The key will be seen as below:
> 
> ProtectionKey: 0
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ram Pai <linuxram@...ibm.com>
> ---
>  arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c |    8 ++++++++
>  1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c
> index f35ff9d..ebc82b3 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c
> @@ -37,6 +37,7 @@
>  #include <linux/memblock.h>
>  #include <linux/memory.h>
>  #include <linux/nmi.h>
> +#include <linux/pkeys.h>
>  
>  #include <asm/io.h>
>  #include <asm/kdump.h>
> @@ -745,3 +746,10 @@ static int __init disable_hardlockup_detector(void)
>  }
>  early_initcall(disable_hardlockup_detector);
>  #endif
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC64_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS

Why not for X86 protection keys ?