On Fri, Sep 26, 2025 at 8:17 AM Andrew Morton <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, 26 Sep 2025 08:42:35 +1000 Andrew Donnellan <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > On Tue, 2025-09-09 at 19:13 +1000, Andrew Donnellan wrote: > > > Support page table check on all PowerPC platforms. This works by > > > serialising > > > assignments, reassignments and clears of page table entries at each level > > > in > > > order to ensure that anonymous mappings have at most one writable > > > consumer, > > > and likewise that file-backed mappings are not simultaneously also > > > anonymous > > > mappings. > > > > > > In order to support this infrastructure, a number of helpers or stubs > > > must be > > > defined or updated for all powerpc platforms. Additionally, we separate > > > set_pte_at() and set_pte_at_unchecked(), to allow for internal, > > > uninstrumented > > > mappings. > > > > > > On some PowerPC platforms, implementing > > > {pte,pmd,pud}_user_accessible_page() > > > requires the address. We revert previous changes that removed the address > > > parameter from various interfaces, and add it to some other interfaces, > > > in order to allow this. > > > > > > Note that on 32 bit systems with CONFIG_KFENCE=y, you need [0] to avoid > > > possible failures in init code (this is a code patching/static keys issue, > > > which was discovered by a user testing this series but isn't a bug in page > > > table check). > > > > > > (This series was initially written by Rohan McLure, who has left IBM and > > > is no longer working on powerpc.) > > > > Is this likely to make it in in time for 6.18, or should I respin it post > > merge > > window? > > The latter, please.
Andrew Donnelan, looks like the merge window missed again, could you please re-send this series so we could get it into 6.20? Thank you, Pasha
