Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Subject | [PATCH 01/10] x86, pkeys: add fault handling for PF_PK page fault bit | From | Dave Hansen <> | Date | Mon, 08 Aug 2016 16:18:21 -0700 |
| |
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
PF_PK means that a memory access violated the protection key access restrictions. It is unconditionally an access_error() because the permissions set on the VMA don't matter (the PKRU value overrides it), and we never "resolve" PK faults (like how a COW can "resolve write fault).
Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net> Cc: linux-api@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org Cc: x86@kernel.org Cc: torvalds@linux-foundation.org Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> ---
b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c | 9 +++++++++ 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
diff -puN arch/x86/mm/fault.c~pkeys-105-add-pk-to-fault arch/x86/mm/fault.c --- a/arch/x86/mm/fault.c~pkeys-105-add-pk-to-fault 2016-08-08 16:15:09.878999452 -0700 +++ b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c 2016-08-08 16:15:09.882999634 -0700 @@ -1112,6 +1112,15 @@ access_error(unsigned long error_code, s { /* This is only called for the current mm, so: */ bool foreign = false; + + /* + * Read or write was blocked by protection keys. This is + * always an unconditional error and can never result in + * a follow-up action to resolve the fault, like a COW. + */ + if (error_code & PF_PK) + return 1; + /* * Make sure to check the VMA so that we do not perform * faults just to hit a PF_PK as soon as we fill in a _
| |