From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8822C4338F for ; Tue, 17 Aug 2021 03:21:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CA4460FD7 for ; Tue, 17 Aug 2021 03:21:26 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 3CA4460FD7 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 9F8078D0001; Mon, 16 Aug 2021 23:21:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 9A7FF6B0072; Mon, 16 Aug 2021 23:21:25 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 896168D0001; Mon, 16 Aug 2021 23:21:25 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0177.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.177]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 717EC6B006C for ; Mon, 16 Aug 2021 23:21:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin17.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A5F918238858 for ; Tue, 17 Aug 2021 03:21:25 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78483122130.17.09A9997 Received: from mga07.intel.com (mga07.intel.com [134.134.136.100]) by imf23.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 444D6900ED4B for ; Tue, 17 Aug 2021 03:21:24 +0000 (UTC) X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6200,9189,10078"; a="279727296" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.84,327,1620716400"; d="scan'208";a="279727296" Received: from fmsmga003.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.29]) by orsmga105.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Aug 2021 20:21:22 -0700 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.84,327,1620716400"; d="scan'208";a="520272465" Received: from iweiny-desk2.sc.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.3.52.147]) by fmsmga003-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Aug 2021 20:21:22 -0700 Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2021 20:21:22 -0700 From: Ira Weiny To: "Edgecombe, Rick P" Cc: "Williams, Dan J" , "dave.hansen@linux.intel.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "peterz@infradead.org" , "nvdimm@lists.linux.dev" , "tglx@linutronix.de" , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "Yu, Fenghua" , "x86@kernel.org" , "hpa@zytor.com" , "mingo@redhat.com" , "Lutomirski, Andy" , "bp@alien8.de" Subject: Re: [PATCH V7 12/18] x86/pks: Add PKS fault callbacks Message-ID: <20210817032121.GG3169279@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com> References: <20210804043231.2655537-1-ira.weiny@intel.com> <20210804043231.2655537-13-ira.weiny@intel.com> <1bb543ebdf5458e90bff97698ee3a1cf69f89aa1.camel@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1bb543ebdf5458e90bff97698ee3a1cf69f89aa1.camel@intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.1 (2018-12-01) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 444D6900ED4B Authentication-Results: imf23.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; dmarc=fail reason="No valid SPF, No valid DKIM" header.from=intel.com (policy=none); spf=none (imf23.hostedemail.com: domain of ira.weiny@intel.com has no SPF policy when checking 134.134.136.100) smtp.mailfrom=ira.weiny@intel.com X-Rspamd-Server: rspam04 X-Stat-Signature: wezyto7ck85agwndycyppzaepmy96xk3 X-HE-Tag: 1629170484-147173 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 02:18:26PM -0700, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote: > On Tue, 2021-08-03 at 21:32 -0700, ira.weiny@intel.com wrote: > > +static const pks_key_callback > > pks_key_callbacks[PKS_KEY_NR_CONSUMERS] = { 0 }; > > + > > +bool handle_pks_key_callback(unsigned long address, bool write, u16 > > key) > > +{ > > + if (key > PKS_KEY_NR_CONSUMERS) > > + return false; > Good idea, should be >= though? Yep. Fixed thanks. > > > + > > + if (pks_key_callbacks[key]) > > + return pks_key_callbacks[key](address, write); > > + > > + return false; > > +} > > + > > Otherwise, I've rebased on this series and didn't hit any problems. > Thanks. Awesome! I still want Dave and Dan to weigh in prior to me respining with the changes so far. Thanks, Ira