From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932772AbcA2SQx (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Jan 2016 13:16:53 -0500 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:10809 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756674AbcA2SQs (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Jan 2016 13:16:48 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,365,1449561600"; d="scan'208";a="892021052" Subject: [PATCH 03/31] x86, pkeys: Add Kconfig option To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, x86@kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, Dave Hansen , dave.hansen@linux.intel.com From: Dave Hansen Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 10:16:47 -0800 References: <20160129181642.98E7D468@viggo.jf.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <20160129181642.98E7D468@viggo.jf.intel.com> Message-Id: <20160129181647.02DFB684@viggo.jf.intel.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Dave Hansen I don't have a strong opinion on whether we need a Kconfig prompt or not. Protection Keys has relatively little code associated with it, and it is not a heavyweight feature to keep enabled. However, I can imagine that folks would still appreciate being able to disable it. Note that, with disabled-features.h, the checks in the code for protection keys are always the same: cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_PKU) With the config option disabled, this essentially turns into an #ifdef. We will hide the prompt for now. Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner --- b/arch/x86/Kconfig | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) diff -puN arch/x86/Kconfig~pkeys-01-kconfig arch/x86/Kconfig --- a/arch/x86/Kconfig~pkeys-01-kconfig 2016-01-28 15:52:17.645279448 -0800 +++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig 2016-01-28 15:52:17.649279631 -0800 @@ -1714,6 +1714,10 @@ config X86_INTEL_MPX If unsure, say N. +config X86_INTEL_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS + def_bool y + depends on CPU_SUP_INTEL && X86_64 + config EFI bool "EFI runtime service support" depends on ACPI _ From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pa0-f41.google.com (mail-pa0-f41.google.com [209.85.220.41]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77EEA828DF for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2016 13:16:55 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-pa0-f41.google.com with SMTP id cy9so45107042pac.0 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2016 10:16:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com. [192.55.52.93]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id v18si22197212pfi.64.2016.01.29.10.16.48 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2016 10:16:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: [PATCH 03/31] x86, pkeys: Add Kconfig option From: Dave Hansen Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 10:16:47 -0800 References: <20160129181642.98E7D468@viggo.jf.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <20160129181642.98E7D468@viggo.jf.intel.com> Message-Id: <20160129181647.02DFB684@viggo.jf.intel.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, x86@kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, Dave Hansen , dave.hansen@linux.intel.com From: Dave Hansen I don't have a strong opinion on whether we need a Kconfig prompt or not. Protection Keys has relatively little code associated with it, and it is not a heavyweight feature to keep enabled. However, I can imagine that folks would still appreciate being able to disable it. Note that, with disabled-features.h, the checks in the code for protection keys are always the same: cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_PKU) With the config option disabled, this essentially turns into an #ifdef. We will hide the prompt for now. Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner --- b/arch/x86/Kconfig | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) diff -puN arch/x86/Kconfig~pkeys-01-kconfig arch/x86/Kconfig --- a/arch/x86/Kconfig~pkeys-01-kconfig 2016-01-28 15:52:17.645279448 -0800 +++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig 2016-01-28 15:52:17.649279631 -0800 @@ -1714,6 +1714,10 @@ config X86_INTEL_MPX If unsure, say N. +config X86_INTEL_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS + def_bool y + depends on CPU_SUP_INTEL && X86_64 + config EFI bool "EFI runtime service support" depends on ACPI _ -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org