From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Nixiaoming <nixiaoming@huawei.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
"catalin.marinas@arm.com" <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
"ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org" <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
"marc.zyngier@arm.com" <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
"james.morse@arm.com" <james.morse@arm.com>,
"kristina.martsenko@arm.com" <kristina.martsenko@arm.com>,
"steve.capper@arm.com" <steve.capper@arm.com>,
"tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"hpa@zytor.com" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"akpm@linux-foundation.org" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"vbabka@suse.cz" <vbabka@suse.cz>,
"mhocko@suse.com" <mhocko@suse.com>,
"dave.hansen@linux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
"dan.j.williams@intel.com" <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
"kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com"
<kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
"zhang.jia@linux.alibaba.com" <zhang.jia@linux.alibaba.com>,
"schwidefsky@de.ibm.com" <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
"heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com" <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
"gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
"linux-s390@vger.kernel.org" <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] arm64:add missing CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX for mark_rodata_ro
Date: Wed, 30 May 2018 09:08:16 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180530080816.f74elebj4demiohl@salmiak> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E490CD805F7529488761C40FD9D26EF12A672E03@dggemm507-mbx.china.huawei.com>
On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 03:31:38AM +0000, Nixiaoming wrote:
> Unable to set CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX=n by make menuconfig ARCH=arm64
Indeed. Making this mandatory was a deliberate decision, in part because this
allows simplification of code (e.g. removal of #ifdef guards).
> When reading the code, I feel it is more appropriate to add macro control
> here.
I must disagree. I do not think it makes sense to add an #ifdef for a
configuration option that is mandatory.
There are other places in the kernel that should behave differently if
CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX were disabled, so this wouldn't be sufficient even if
we were to make CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX optional. i.e. the #ifdef would give
the misleading impression that STRICT_KERNEL_RWX *could* be made optional, even
though this might not function correctly.
Having an #ifdef here makes the code more complicated and confusing, for the
benefit of a case which cannot occur.
Thanks,
Mark.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Will Deacon [mailto:will.deacon@arm.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2018 11:45 PM
> To: Nixiaoming <nixiaoming@huawei.com>
> Cc: catalin.marinas@arm.com; ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org; marc.zyngier@arm.com; james.morse@arm.com; kristina.martsenko@arm.com; steve.capper@arm.com; tglx@linutronix.de; mingo@redhat.com; hpa@zytor.com; akpm@linux-foundation.org; vbabka@suse.cz; mhocko@suse.com; dave.hansen@linux.intel.com; dan.j.williams@intel.com; kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com; zhang.jia@linux.alibaba.com; schwidefsky@de.ibm.com; heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com; gregkh@linuxfoundation.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; x86@kernel.org; linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] arm64:add missing CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX for mark_rodata_ro
>
> On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 09:36:15PM +0800, nixiaoming wrote:
> > mark_rodata_ro is only called by the function mark_readonly when
> > CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX=y,
> > if CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX is not set
> > a compile warning may be triggered: unused function
>
> How are you achieving this configuration? In our Kconfig we select this
> unconditionally.
>
> Will
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-30 8:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-29 13:36 nixiaoming
2018-05-29 15:45 ` Will Deacon
2018-05-30 3:31 ` Nixiaoming
2018-05-30 8:08 ` Mark Rutland [this message]
2018-05-30 9:05 ` Nixiaoming
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2018-05-28 3:33 nixiaoming
2018-05-29 9:21 ` Will Deacon
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180530080816.f74elebj4demiohl@salmiak \
--to=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=kristina.martsenko@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=nixiaoming@huawei.com \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
--cc=steve.capper@arm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=zhang.jia@linux.alibaba.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®