[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8736z21ab1.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au>
Date: Wed, 09 May 2018 00:39:14 +1000
From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
To: Ram Pai <linuxram@...ibm.com>, mingo@...hat.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Cc: linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, x86@...nel.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
dave.hansen@...el.com, benh@...nel.crashing.org, paulus@...ba.org,
khandual@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
bsingharora@...il.com, hbabu@...ibm.com, mhocko@...nel.org,
bauerman@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
linuxram@...ibm.com, corbet@....net, arnd@...db.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 0/3] mm, x86, powerpc: Enhancements to Memory Protection Keys.
Ram Pai <linuxram@...ibm.com> writes:
> This patch series provides arch-neutral enhancements to
> enable memory-keys on new architecutes, and the corresponding
> changes in x86 and powerpc specific code to support that.
>
> a) Provides ability to support upto 32 keys. PowerPC
> can handle 32 keys and hence needs this.
>
> b) Arch-neutral code; and not the arch-specific code,
> determines the format of the string, that displays the key
> for each vma in smaps.
>
> History:
> -------
> version 14:
This doesn't match the patch subjects, which is a little confusing :)
> (1) made VM_PKEY_BIT4 unusable on x86, #defined it to 0
> -- comment by Dave Hansen
> (2) due to some reason this patch series continue to
> break some or the other build. The last series
> passed everything but created a merge
> conflict followed by build failure for
> Michael Ellermen. :(
I have a fix, it involved some cleanup of headers prior to the smaps
change.
Will post it.
cheers
Powered by blists - more mailing lists