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 Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC80DC52D6F for ; Mon, 19 Aug 2024 17:09:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 553736B007B; Mon, 19 Aug 2024 13:09:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 5037A6B0082; Mon, 19 Aug 2024 13:09:17 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 3A47F6B0083; Mon, 19 Aug 2024 13:09:17 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0013.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.13]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B2C06B007B for ; Mon, 19 Aug 2024 13:09:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin01.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay09.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5F4281442 for ; Mon, 19 Aug 2024 17:09:16 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 82469630712.01.C47B4D8 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [139.178.84.217]) by imf24.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02B97180016 for ; Mon, 19 Aug 2024 17:09:14 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf24.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed), No valid DKIM" header.from=arm.com (policy=none); spf=pass (imf24.hostedemail.com: domain of cmarinas@kernel.org designates 139.178.84.217 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=cmarinas@kernel.org ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1724087339; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=EHVu7Wao2XKX2vgKwhRgOTFSprcHn4Hq6O6XrVOxJS6zYPKxRr+Ub7YMznmPhyb2s+lUlG 8im2rkVFv5cQw2IdEFE06KKbiSHRGmItQ9S1Vm+efRpczJFiEb90sUnDu94WO0Zvab5C5z 1oJqg2wUXpoF219qZvivdYavQujFVtk= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf24.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed), No valid DKIM" header.from=arm.com (policy=none); spf=pass (imf24.hostedemail.com: domain of cmarinas@kernel.org designates 139.178.84.217 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=cmarinas@kernel.org ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1724087339; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=+Uxaf2uPEGz6JAIwWcp+uLDwRv/wXm5qa8lSaQMiGRM=; b=bsUCFnm8lfRjW3nZDQlsQNq3K9xkkUnrXd3nbRnNTL4+1+hnUX92y+VxKWV626eTE4/t+a jIJWa5jMWcJ1+nwDjWpFFWwCEMNjYeQR8ie9/4i2xUq+A3Xh3B7pZHAGguKLHCnQT4g1lt IwAhGuH+nug5X2xzWRZfXkVztfcuYKw= Received: from smtp.kernel.org (transwarp.subspace.kernel.org [100.75.92.58]) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2DDD60A3C; Mon, 19 Aug 2024 17:09:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 31FABC4AF0E; Mon, 19 Aug 2024 17:09:09 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2024 18:09:06 +0100 From: Catalin Marinas To: Dave Martin Cc: Joey Gouly , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, aneesh.kumar@kernel.org, aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com, bp@alien8.de, broonie@kernel.org, christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, hpa@zytor.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, maz@kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com, mpe@ellerman.id.au, naveen.n.rao@linux.ibm.com, npiggin@gmail.com, oliver.upton@linux.dev, shuah@kernel.org, szabolcs.nagy@arm.com, tglx@linutronix.de, will@kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 18/29] arm64: add POE signal support Message-ID: References: <20240503130147.1154804-1-joey.gouly@arm.com> <20240503130147.1154804-19-joey.gouly@arm.com> <20240801155441.GB841837@e124191.cambridge.arm.com> <20240806103532.GA1986436@e124191.cambridge.arm.com> <20240806143103.GB2017741@e124191.cambridge.arm.com> <20240815131815.GA3657684@e124191.cambridge.arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-TUID: jP0NMMmVUuyc X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 02B97180016 X-Rspamd-Server: rspam01 X-Stat-Signature: qyaetpbx8csh41efcoub5zxfrn5unj3x X-HE-Tag: 1724087354-657928 X-HE-Meta: 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 ccYwbu3Z c3y/r+vPtaMd/fG0rw9LRqTKvrU44II/bxRJ+DARND7er1FEK13NAlZst30AcLMHmiNwX4xuuIYhtHdXg4bQMK/4/SSX5jfU94kZ5gKByWHihGR+Pv2VPsT6y2eOpayCVspv4pSc0REEhUnNknC4Ml4i6wHOgcsRwRoYkVzBCtFX/Blp1EaVu27ZJXf9zrvAA3stH8jFN1mhRHWJV5jwP5yHPBZZunQgmOhUECW+CfyZaq6q5IbQC848IgRi7sqftz0R7yZThsYsNglOS/seezI2+1PiRiWsOEKw7kwz8YXLXqp/cSg9JoivWsNeTSh4jL26yT9PqyGEdD7LpZrGmQIkcbFbdY8VWxbtf 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: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 04:09:26PM +0100, Dave P Martin wrote: > On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 02:18:15PM +0100, Joey Gouly wrote: > > That's a lot of words to say, or ask, do you agree with the approach of only > > saving POR_EL0 in the signal frame if num_allocated_pkeys() > 1? > > > > Thanks, > > Joey > > ...So..., given all the above, it is perhaps best to go back to > dumping POR_EL0 unconditionally after all, unless we have a mechanism > to determine whether pkeys are in use at all. Ah, I can see why checking for POR_EL0_INIT is useful. Only checking for the allocated keys gets confusing with pkey 0. Not sure what the deal is with pkey 0. Is it considered allocated by default or unallocatable? If the former, it implies that pkeys are already in use (hence the additional check for POR_EL0_INIT). In principle the hardware allows us to use permissions where the pkeys do not apply but we'd run out of indices and PTE bits to encode them, so I think by default we should assume that pkey 0 is pre-allocated. So I agree that it's probably best to save it unconditionally. -- Catalin