Messages in this thread | | | From | Thomas Gleixner <> | Subject | Re: [RFCv2 00/10] Linear Address Masking enabling | Date | Fri, 13 May 2022 03:27:24 +0200 |
| |
On Thu, May 12 2022 at 17:46, Dave Hansen wrote: > On 5/12/22 17:08, H.J. Lu wrote: > If I had to take a shot at this today, I think I'd opt for: > > mask = sys_enable_masking(bits=6, flags=FUZZY_NR_BITS); > > although I'm not super confident about the "fuzzy" flag. I also don't > think I'd totally hate the "blind" interface where the kernel just gets > to pick unilaterally and takes zero input from userspace.
That's the only sane choice and you can make it simple for userspace:
ret = prctl(GET_XXX_MASK, &mask);
and then let it decide based on @ret and @mask whether to use it or not.
But of course nobody thought about this as a generic feature and so we have the ARM64 TBI muck as a precedence.
So much for coordination and portability...
I'm so tired of this short sighted 'cram my feature in' approach of _all_ involved parties.
Thanks,
tglx
| |