Re: [PATCH] mm/secretmem: disable under HIGHMEM

[David Hildenbrand (Arm)]

On 7/15/26 13:33, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2026 at 11:22:33AM +0000, Brendan Jackman wrote:
>> On Mon Jul 6, 2026 at 8:42 AM UTC, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote:
>>>
>>> Right.
>>>
>>>
>>> We could even limit it to 64BIT ;)
>>
>> I fear this in limbo, we have quite a wide range of opinions from "fix
>> the broken configuration" all the way to "disable secretmem completely on
>> 32bit". I'm not passionately committed to any one answer but I do think
>> we need to pick something.
>>
>> Mike's position seems to be roughly "in the middle" of the spectrum, and
> 
> Right :)
> Supporting 32-bit without HIGHMEM is easy, so I don't think we should limit
> it to 64BIT at this point.

You mean

diff --git a/mm/secretmem.c b/mm/secretmem.c
index 4877c262cb1f6..d29865075b6ea 100644
--- a/mm/secretmem.c
+++ b/mm/secretmem.c
@@ -202,7 +202,7 @@ static struct file *secretmem_file_create(unsigned long flags)
        if (IS_ERR(file))
                goto err_free_inode;

-       mapping_set_gfp_mask(inode->i_mapping, GFP_HIGHUSER);
+       mapping_set_gfp_mask(inode->i_mapping, GFP_USER);
        mapping_set_unevictable(inode->i_mapping);

        inode->i_op = &secretmem_iops;


then?

-- 
Cheers,

David