Re: [PATCH v2] sparc64: Add support for Application Data Integrity (ADI)
From: David Miller <hidden>
Date: 2016-03-07 21:34:13
Also in:
linux-arch, linux-mm, lkml, sparclinux
From: David Miller <hidden>
Date: 2016-03-07 21:34:13
Also in:
linux-arch, linux-mm, lkml, sparclinux
From: Khalid Aziz <redacted> Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 14:27:09 -0700
I agree with your point of view. PSTATE.mcde and TTE.mcd are set in response to request from userspace. If userspace asked for them to be set, they already know but it was the database guys that asked for these two functions and they are the primary customers for the ADI feature. I am not crazy about this idea since this extends the mprotect API even further but would you consider using the return value from mprotect to indicate if PSTATE.mcde or TTE.mcd were already set on the given address?
Well, that's the idea. If the mprotect using MAP_ADI or whatever succeeds, then ADI is enabled. Users can thus also pass MAP_ADI as a flag to mmap() to get ADI protection from the very beginning.