From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Bin Yang <bin.yang@intel.com>, Mark Gross <mark.gross@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 02/10] x86/mm/cpa: Rework static_protections()
Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2018 09:21:32 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5cc869d4-ef55-3010-46be-cf5a3081c62d@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180907152054.558544759@linutronix.de>
On 09/07/2018 08:01 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> +static inline pgprot_t static_protections(pgprot_t prot, unsigned long address,
> + unsigned long pfn)
> +{
> + pgprotval_t forbidden;
> +
> + /* Operate on the virtual address */
> + forbidden = protect_kernel_text(address);
> + forbidden |= protect_kernel_text_ro(address);
> +
> + /* Check the PFN directly */
> + forbidden |= protect_pci_bios(pfn);
> + forbidden |= protect_rodata(pfn);
>
> - return prot;
> + return __pgprot(pgprot_val(prot) & ~forbidden);
> }
Wow, that's quite an improvement, especially separating the vaddr vs.
paddr checks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-09-07 16:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-09-07 15:01 [patch 00/10] x86/mm/cpa: Improve large page preservation handling Thomas Gleixner
2018-09-07 15:01 ` [patch 01/10] x86/mm/cpa: Split, rename and clean up try_preserve_large_page() Thomas Gleixner
2018-09-10 2:03 ` Yang, Bin
2018-09-10 7:04 ` Thomas Gleixner
2018-09-07 15:01 ` [patch 02/10] x86/mm/cpa: Rework static_protections() Thomas Gleixner
2018-09-07 16:21 ` Dave Hansen [this message]
2018-09-07 15:01 ` [patch 03/10] x86/mm/cpa: Allow range check for static protections Thomas Gleixner
2018-09-07 15:01 ` [patch 04/10] x86/mm/cpa: Add debug mechanism Thomas Gleixner
2018-09-07 15:01 ` [patch 05/10] x86/mm/cpa: Add large page preservation statistics Thomas Gleixner
2018-09-07 15:01 ` [patch 06/10] x86/mm/cpa: Avoid static protection checks on unmap Thomas Gleixner
2018-09-07 15:01 ` [patch 07/10] x86/mm/cpa: Add sanity check for existing mappings Thomas Gleixner
2018-09-07 15:01 ` [patch 08/10] x86/mm/cpa: Optimize same protection check Thomas Gleixner
2018-09-07 15:01 ` [patch 09/10] x86/mm/cpa: Do the range check early Thomas Gleixner
2018-09-07 15:01 ` [patch 10/10] x86/mm/cpa: Avoid the 4k pages check completely Thomas Gleixner
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=5cc869d4-ef55-3010-46be-cf5a3081c62d@intel.com \
--to=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=bin.yang@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.gross@intel.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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
Powered by JetHome