On 5/7/20 11:07 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 07/05/20 18:06, Babu Moger wrote:
So, for now my preference would be to change the prompt, but leave the
CONFIG_ naming in place.
>>> I agree.
>>>
>>> What's in a name? An Intel rose by any other name would smell as sweet.
>>
>> How about
On 07/05/20 18:06, Babu Moger wrote:
>>> So, for now my preference would be to change the prompt, but leave the
>>> CONFIG_ naming in place.
>> I agree.
>>
>> What's in a name? An Intel rose by any other name would smell as sweet.
>
> How about X86_MPK? Or I will use already proposed name
> X86_M
On 5/7/20 10:16 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 07/05/20 16:44, Dave Hansen wrote:
>>> You could add a new option (X86_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS) which is
>>> def_bool X86_INTEL_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS and avoiding the prompt line.
>>> Soo it is selected based on the old option and the user isn't both
On 07/05/20 16:44, Dave Hansen wrote:
>> You could add a new option (X86_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS) which is
>> def_bool X86_INTEL_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS and avoiding the prompt line.
>> Soo it is selected based on the old option and the user isn't bother. A
>> few cycles later you could remove intel
On 5/7/20 12:29 AM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
>>> -config X86_INTEL_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS
>>> - prompt "Intel Memory Protection Keys"
>>> +config X86_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS
>>> + prompt "Memory Protection Keys"
>>> def_bool y
>>> # Note: only available in 64-bit mode
>>> - dep
On 2020-05-06 15:21:29 [-0700], Dave Hansen wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig
> > index 1197b5596d5a..8630b9fa06f5 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/Kconfig
> > +++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig
> > @@ -1886,11 +1886,11 @@ config X86_UMIP
> > specific cases in protected and virtual-808
On 2020-05-06 4:21 p.m., Dave Hansen wrote:
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig
>> index 1197b5596d5a..8630b9fa06f5 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/Kconfig
>> +++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig
>> @@ -1886,11 +1886,11 @@ config X86_UMIP
>>specific cases in protected and virtual-8086 modes.
On 5/6/20 3:21 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> I'm really just wondering what the point of the churn is.
The config option is also in the manpages, fwiw:
http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man7/pkeys.7.html
By the way, I am regretting ever sticking "INTEL_" in there. Seems like
a good best practi
> diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig
> index 1197b5596d5a..8630b9fa06f5 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig
> @@ -1886,11 +1886,11 @@ config X86_UMIP
> specific cases in protected and virtual-8086 modes. Emulated
> results are dummy.
>
> -config
AMD's next generation of EPYC processors support the MPK (Memory
Protection Keys) feature.
So, rename X86_INTEL_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS to X86_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS.
No functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Babu Moger
---
Documentation/core-api/protection-keys.rst |3 ++-
arch/x86/Kconfig
10 matches
Mail list logo
