Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <eff862e2-bfaa-9e12-42b5-a12467d72a22@intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 2 Feb 2022 12:26:44 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.5.0
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>
Cc:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
        Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20220127175505.851391-1-ira.weiny@intel.com>
 <20220127175505.851391-5-ira.weiny@intel.com>
 <8967ea5a-99bf-8990-6ee1-8e0d32031f16@intel.com>
 <20220202202159.GU785175@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com>
From:   Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V8 04/44] x86/pkeys: Add additional PKEY helper macros
In-Reply-To: <20220202202159.GU785175@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 2/2/22 12:21, Ira Weiny wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 02:47:30PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
>> #define PKR_WD_MASK(pkey)	(PKR_WD_BIT << PKR_PKEY_SHIFT(pkey))
>>
>> Which says, "generate a write-disabled mask for this pkey".
> 
> I think the confusion comes from me having used these as mask values rather
> than what PKR_AD_KEY() was intended to be used for.
> 
> In the previous patch PKR_AD_KEY() is used to set up the default user pkey
> value...
> 
> u32 init_pkru_value = PKR_AD_KEY( 1) | PKR_AD_KEY( 2) | PKR_AD_KEY( 3) |
> 		      PKR_AD_KEY( 4) | PKR_AD_KEY( 5) | PKR_AD_KEY( 6) |
> 		      PKR_AD_KEY( 7) | PKR_AD_KEY( 8) | PKR_AD_KEY( 9) |
> 		      PKR_AD_KEY(10) | PKR_AD_KEY(11) | PKR_AD_KEY(12) |
> 		      PKR_AD_KEY(13) | PKR_AD_KEY(14) | PKR_AD_KEY(15);
> 

Hah, I'm complaining about my own code.

> u32 init_pkru_value = PKR_AD_MASK( 1) | PKR_AD_MASK( 2) | PKR_AD_MASK( 3) |
> 		      PKR_AD_MASK( 4) | PKR_AD_MASK( 5) | PKR_AD_MASK( 6) |
> 		      PKR_AD_MASK( 7) | PKR_AD_MASK( 8) | PKR_AD_MASK( 9) |
> 		      PKR_AD_MASK(10) | PKR_AD_MASK(11) | PKR_AD_MASK(12) |
> 		      PKR_AD_MASK(13) | PKR_AD_MASK(14) | PKR_AD_MASK(15);
> 
> It seems odd to me.  Does it seem odd to you?

Looks OK to me.  It's build a "value" out of a bunch of individual masks.

> Looking at the final code I think I'm going to just drop the usages in this
> patch and add PKR_WD_KEY() where it is used first.
> 
> Also, how about PKR_KEY_INIT_{AD|WD|RW}() as a name?

For the PKR_AD_KEY() macro?