[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180710104809.pigivw4n4yuehdpo@kshutemo-mobl1>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 13:48:09 +0300
From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Kai Huang <kai.huang@...ux.intel.com>,
Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 07/18] x86/mm: Introduce variables to store number,
shift and mask of KeyIDs
On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 02:09:49PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/Makefile b/arch/x86/mm/Makefile
> > index 4b101dd6e52f..4ebee899c363 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/mm/Makefile
> > +++ b/arch/x86/mm/Makefile
> > @@ -53,3 +53,5 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_PAGE_TABLE_ISOLATION) += pti.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_AMD_MEM_ENCRYPT) += mem_encrypt.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_AMD_MEM_ENCRYPT) += mem_encrypt_identity.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_AMD_MEM_ENCRYPT) += mem_encrypt_boot.o
> > +
> > +obj-$(CONFIG_X86_INTEL_MKTME) += mktme.o
>
> Any particular reason to have x86 in the CONFIG?
It is consistent with MPX and protection keys.
--
Kirill A. Shutemov
Powered by blists - more mailing lists