Thread (37 messages) 37 messages, 3 authors, 2016-02-09
STALE3797d REVIEWED: 1 (0M)

[PATCH 08/31] x86, pkeys: new page fault error code bit: PF_PK

From: Dave Hansen <hidden>
Date: 2016-01-29 18:17:00
Also in: lkml

From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>

Note: "PK" is how the Intel SDM refers to this bit, so we also
use that nomenclature.

This only defines the bit, it does not plumb it anywhere to be
handled.

Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <redacted>
---

 b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c |    8 ++++++++
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)

diff -puN arch/x86/mm/fault.c~pkeys-05-pfec arch/x86/mm/fault.c
--- a/arch/x86/mm/fault.c~pkeys-05-pfec	2016-01-28 15:52:19.775377103 -0800
+++ b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c	2016-01-28 15:52:19.778377241 -0800
@@ -33,6 +33,7 @@
  *   bit 2 ==	 0: kernel-mode access	1: user-mode access
  *   bit 3 ==				1: use of reserved bit detected
  *   bit 4 ==				1: fault was an instruction fetch
+ *   bit 5 ==				1: protection keys block access
  */
 enum x86_pf_error_code {
 
@@ -41,6 +42,7 @@ enum x86_pf_error_code {
 	PF_USER		=		1 << 2,
 	PF_RSVD		=		1 << 3,
 	PF_INSTR	=		1 << 4,
+	PF_PK		=		1 << 5,
 };
 
 /*
@@ -916,6 +918,12 @@ static int spurious_fault_check(unsigned
 
 	if ((error_code & PF_INSTR) && !pte_exec(*pte))
 		return 0;
+	/*
+	 * Note: We do not do lazy flushing on protection key
+	 * changes, so no spurious fault will ever set PF_PK.
+	 */
+	if ((error_code & PF_PK))
+		return 1;
 
 	return 1;
 }
_

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help