[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201206113048.GC123287@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2020 13:30:48 +0200
From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Christopher Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Elena Reshetova <elena.reshetova@...el.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
James Bottomley <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>,
Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ho.ws>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
linux-api@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
x86@...nel.org, Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 09/10] arch, mm: wire up memfd_secret system call
were relevant
On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 03:39:16PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 08:29:48 +0200 Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> > From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>
> >
> > Wire up memfd_secret system call on architectures that define
> > ARCH_HAS_SET_DIRECT_MAP, namely arm64, risc-v and x86.
> >
> > ...
> >
> > --- a/include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h
> > +++ b/include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h
> > @@ -861,9 +861,13 @@ __SYSCALL(__NR_faccessat2, sys_faccessat2)
> > __SYSCALL(__NR_process_madvise, sys_process_madvise)
> > #define __NR_watch_mount 441
> > __SYSCALL(__NR_watch_mount, sys_watch_mount)
> > +#ifdef __ARCH_WANT_MEMFD_SECRET
> > +#define __NR_memfd_secret 442
> > +__SYSCALL(__NR_memfd_secret, sys_memfd_secret)
> > +#endif
>
> Why do we add the ifdef? Can't we simply define the syscall on all
> architectures and let sys_ni do its thing?
I quite blindly copied it from clone3. I agree there is no real need for
it and sys_ni handles this just fine.
--
Sincerely yours,
Mike.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists