[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20170713080348.GH5525@ram.oc3035372033.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2017 01:03:48 -0700
From: Ram Pai <linuxram@...ibm.com>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
Cc: 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,
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, 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 Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 11:13:56AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 07/05/2017 02:22 PM, Ram Pai wrote:
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC64_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS
> > +void arch_show_smap(struct seq_file *m, struct vm_area_struct *vma)
> > +{
> > + seq_printf(m, "ProtectionKey: %8u\n", vma_pkey(vma));
> > +}
> > +#endif /* CONFIG_PPC64_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS */
>
> This seems like kinda silly unnecessary duplication. Could we just put
> this in the fs/proc/ code and #ifdef it on ARCH_HAS_PKEYS?
Well x86 predicates it based on availability of X86_FEATURE_OSPKE.
powerpc doesn't need that check or any similar check. So trying to
generalize the code does not save much IMHO.
maybe have a seperate inline function that does
seq_printf(m, "ProtectionKey: %8u\n", vma_pkey(vma));
and is called from x86 and powerpc's arch_show_smap()?
At least will keep the string format captured in
one single place.
thoughts?
RP
Powered by blists - more mailing lists