From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qt0-f198.google.com (mail-qt0-f198.google.com [209.85.216.198]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 026B26B0005 for ; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 08:17:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-qt0-f198.google.com with SMTP id f8-v6so4577045qtb.23 for ; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 05:17:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx3-rdu2.redhat.com. [66.187.233.73]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id e33-v6si14642qte.258.2018.06.12.05.17.24 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 12 Jun 2018 05:17:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: pkeys on POWER: Access rights not reset on execve References: <20180603201832.GA10109@ram.oc3035372033.ibm.com> <4e53b91f-80a7-816a-3e9b-56d7be7cd092@redhat.com> <20180604140135.GA10088@ram.oc3035372033.ibm.com> <20180604190229.GB10088@ram.oc3035372033.ibm.com> <30040030-1aa2-623b-beec-dd1ceb3eb9a7@redhat.com> <20180608023441.GA5573@ram.oc3035372033.ibm.com> <2858a8eb-c9b5-42ce-5cfc-74a4b3ad6aa9@redhat.com> <20180611172305.GB5697@ram.oc3035372033.ibm.com> <30f5cb0e-e09a-15e6-f77d-a3afa422a651@redhat.com> <20180611200807.GA5773@ram.oc3035372033.ibm.com> From: Florian Weimer Message-ID: Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 14:17:21 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180611200807.GA5773@ram.oc3035372033.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Ram Pai Cc: Linux-MM , linuxppc-dev , Andy Lutomirski , Dave Hansen On 06/11/2018 10:08 PM, Ram Pai wrote: > Ok. try this patch. This patch is on top of the 5 patches that I had > sent last week i.e "[PATCH 0/5] powerpc/pkeys: fixes to pkeys" > > The following is a draft patch though to check if it meets your > expectations. > > commit fe53b5fe2dcb3139ea27ade3ae7cbbe43c4af3be > Author: Ram Pai > Date: Mon Jun 11 14:57:34 2018 -0500 > > powerpc/pkeys: Deny read/write/execute by default With this patch, my existing misc/tst-pkey test in glibc passes. The in-tree version still has some incorrect assumptions on implementation behavior, but those are test bugs. The kernel behavior with your patch look good to me. Thanks. Florian