[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <66a227f2-8056-6318-111e-3b0abd5d94c3@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 29 May 2020 11:28:56 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, sean.j.christopherson@...el.com,
nhorman@...hat.com, npmccallum@...hat.com, haitao.huang@...el.com,
andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
kai.svahn@...el.com, bp@...en8.de, josh@...htriplett.org,
luto@...nel.org, kai.huang@...el.com, rientjes@...gle.com,
cedric.xing@...el.com, puiterwijk@...hat.com,
Jethro Beekman <jethro@...tanix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v30 09/20] mm: Introduce vm_ops->may_mprotect()
On 5/14/20 5:43 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> From: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>
>
> Add vm_ops()->may_mprotect() to check additional constrains set by a
> subsystem for a mprotect() call.
This changelog needs some more detail about why this is needed. It
would also be nice to include thought about what else it could get used
for and what subsystems can expect by doing this and what the mm core is
expected to do.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists