Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Fri, 30 Jul 2021 03:34:35 +0300
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org>
To:     "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
Cc:     "Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
        "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/7] x86/sgx: Provide indication of life-cycle of EPC
 pages
Message-ID: <20210730003435.bge53hlxpzpijdw7@kernel.org>
References: <20210719182009.1409895-1-tony.luck@intel.com>
 <20210728204653.1509010-1-tony.luck@intel.com>
 <20210728204653.1509010-2-tony.luck@intel.com>
 <17054ca5-0ef7-4b28-ab26-b1b96aa7403f@intel.com>
 <f2685d7c8dc14792a4e0f9807f742ea6@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <f2685d7c8dc14792a4e0f9807f742ea6@intel.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 10:57:07PM +0000, Luck, Tony wrote:
> > Wouldn't it be safer to do something like:
> >
> >	page->owner = owner ? owner : (void *)-1;
> >
> > -1 is non-NULL, but also invalid, which makes it harder for us to poke
> > ourselves in the eye.
> 
> Does Linux have some #define INVALID_POINTER thing that
> provides a guaranteed bad (e.g. non-canonical) value?
> 
> (void *)-1 seems hacky.
> 
> -Tony

MAP_FAILED?

/Jarkko