Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 29 Oct 2018 07:36:26 +0100
From:   Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To:     Daniel Micay <danielmicay@gmail.com>
Cc:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, jroedel@suse.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86/pkeys: copy pkey state at fork()
Message-ID: <20181029063626.GD128403@gmail.com>
References: <20181026195146.9C7C1136@viggo.jf.intel.com>
 <0e5fd8bc-0b18-ea88-ed95-ec81a44d0783@intel.com>
 <CA+DvKQLpizz2LJppOts1fB6ujQNqj0fii8mo-UfosoYpQWRb5g@mail.gmail.com>
 <FA6429E0-C480-47AA-AAF0-95E615D8265B@amacapital.net>
 <CA+DvKQJYmWm6uP6k4HYdkuTdMX7=rSu34W2j-Vk8YcnWZVA-3w@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CA+DvKQJYmWm6uP6k4HYdkuTdMX7=rSu34W2j-Vk8YcnWZVA-3w@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


* Daniel Micay <danielmicay@gmail.com> wrote:

> > I suppose we could add a new flag for pkey_get() or something.
> 
> That would work, since I can apply the workaround (disabling the
> feature in child processes) if I get EINVAL. The flag wouldn't need to
> do anything, just existing and being tied to this patch so I have a
> way to detect that I can safely use MPK after fork.

A new flag for the pkey_alloc() syscall, right?

Thanks,

	Ingo