Dave Hansen dave.hansen@intel.com writes:
On 02/21/2018 05:55 PM, Ram Pai wrote:
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/protection_keys.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/protection_keys.c @@ -461,7 +461,7 @@ void pkey_disable_clear(int pkey, int flags) pkey, pkey, pkey_rights); pkey_assert(pkey_rights >= 0);
- pkey_rights |= flags;
pkey_rights &= ~flags;
ret = pkey_set(pkey, pkey_rights, 0); /* pkey_reg and flags have the same format */
@@ -475,7 +475,7 @@ void pkey_disable_clear(int pkey, int flags) dprintf1("%s(%d) pkey_reg: 0x%016lx\n", __func__, pkey, rdpkey_reg()); if (flags)
assert(rdpkey_reg() > orig_pkey_reg);
assert(rdpkey_reg() < orig_pkey_reg);}
void pkey_write_allow(int pkey)
This seems so horribly wrong that I wonder how it worked in the first place. Any idea?
The code simply wasn't used. pkey_disable_clear() is called by pkey_write_allow() and pkey_access_allow(), but before this patch series nothing called either of these functions.
-- Thiago Jung Bauermann IBM Linux Technology Center
-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kselftest" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html