From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ed1-f71.google.com (mail-ed1-f71.google.com [209.85.208.71]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BA496B0003 for ; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 12:04:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-ed1-f71.google.com with SMTP id b9-v6so742646edn.18 for ; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 09:04:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com. [148.163.158.5]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id r12-v6si964166eda.307.2018.07.17.09.04.05 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 17 Jul 2018 09:04:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098413.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w6HFxkED078697 for ; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 12:04:04 -0400 Received: from e06smtp01.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp01.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.97]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2k9k00hwb9-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 12:04:03 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp01.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 17:04:02 +0100 Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2018 09:03:51 -0700 From: Ram Pai Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 16/24] selftests/vm: clear the bits in shadow reg when a pkey is freed. Reply-To: Ram Pai References: <1528937115-10132-1-git-send-email-linuxram@us.ibm.com> <1528937115-10132-17-git-send-email-linuxram@us.ibm.com> <0b534ee8-5747-2811-745c-d87b3e720955@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <0b534ee8-5747-2811-745c-d87b3e720955@intel.com> Message-Id: <20180717160351.GD5790@ram.oc3035372033.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Dave Hansen Cc: shuahkh@osg.samsung.com, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com, mhocko@kernel.org, bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com, fweimer@redhat.com, msuchanek@suse.de, aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 08:07:31AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote: > On 06/13/2018 05:45 PM, Ram Pai wrote: > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/protection_keys.c > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/protection_keys.c > > @@ -577,7 +577,8 @@ int sys_pkey_free(unsigned long pkey) > > int ret = syscall(SYS_pkey_free, pkey); > > > > if (!ret) > > - shadow_pkey_reg &= clear_pkey_flags(pkey, PKEY_DISABLE_ACCESS); > > + shadow_pkey_reg &= clear_pkey_flags(pkey, > > + PKEY_DISABLE_ACCESS | PKEY_DISABLE_WRITE); > > dprintf1("%s(pkey=%ld) syscall ret: %d\n", __func__, pkey, ret); > > return ret; > > } > > Why did you introduce this code earlier and then modify it now? > > BTW, my original aversion to this code still stands. Have entirely got rid of this code in the new version. -- Ram Pai