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;
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
        Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFCv2 00/10] Linear Address Masking enabling
In-Reply-To: <67aef839-0757-37b1-a42d-154c0116cbf5@intel.com>
References: <20220511022751.65540-1-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
 <20220511064943.GR76023@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20bada85-9203-57f4-2502-57a6fd11f3ea@intel.com> <875ymav8ul.ffs@tglx>
 <55176b79-90af-4a47-dc06-9f5f2f2c123d@intel.com>
 <CAMe9rOqb6ZnAZYe4uAWDt-vmhhP=z_+uZwi5fBURqyUWxCX9Cg@mail.gmail.com>
 <87o802tjd7.ffs@tglx>
 <CAMe9rOpXOLEMcir9zMq_UJe08Y-kM+9zok6gDicqAhPySV+3NA@mail.gmail.com>
 <67aef839-0757-37b1-a42d-154c0116cbf5@intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 13 May 2022 03:27:24 +0200
Message-ID: <878rr6te6b.ffs@tglx>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, May 12 2022 at 17:46, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 5/12/22 17:08, H.J. Lu wrote:
> If I had to take a shot at this today, I think I'd opt for:
>
> 	mask = sys_enable_masking(bits=6, flags=FUZZY_NR_BITS);
>
> although I'm not super confident about the "fuzzy" flag.  I also don't
> think I'd totally hate the "blind" interface where the kernel just gets
> to pick unilaterally and takes zero input from userspace.

That's the only sane choice and you can make it simple for userspace:

       ret = prctl(GET_XXX_MASK, &mask);

and then let it decide based on @ret and @mask whether to use it or not.

But of course nobody thought about this as a generic feature and so we
have the ARM64 TBI muck as a precedence.

So much for coordination and portability...

I'm so tired of this short sighted 'cram my feature in' approach of
_all_ involved parties.

Thanks,

        tglx