RE: [PATCH 1/3] arm64:add missing CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX for mark_rodata_ro

[Nixiaoming]

Because CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX=n cannot be set by make menuconfig on arm64/x86/s390 architecture 
So, these three patches should not be necessary
Sorry to disturb everyone
Thank you for your guidance

Thanks

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Rutland [mailto:mark.rutland@xxxxxxx] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2018 4:08 PM
To: Nixiaoming <nixiaoming@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@xxxxxxx>; catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx; ard.biesheuvel@xxxxxxxxxx; marc.zyngier@xxxxxxx; james.morse@xxxxxxx; kristina.martsenko@xxxxxxx; steve.capper@xxxxxxx; tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; mingo@xxxxxxxxxx; hpa@xxxxxxxxx; akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; vbabka@xxxxxxx; mhocko@xxxxxxxx; dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx; kirill.shutemov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; zhang.jia@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; schwidefsky@xxxxxxxxxx; heiko.carstens@xxxxxxxxxx; gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; x86@xxxxxxxxxx; linux-s390@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] arm64:add missing CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX for mark_rodata_ro

On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 03:31:38AM +0000, Nixiaoming wrote:
> Unable to set CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX=n by make menuconfig ARCH=arm64

Indeed. Making this mandatory was a deliberate decision, in part because this
allows simplification of code (e.g. removal of #ifdef guards).

> When reading the code, I feel it is more appropriate to add macro control
> here.

I must disagree. I do not think it makes sense to add an #ifdef for a
configuration option that is mandatory.

There are other places in the kernel that should behave differently if
CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX were disabled, so this wouldn't be sufficient even if
we were to make CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX optional. i.e. the #ifdef would give
the misleading impression that STRICT_KERNEL_RWX *could* be made optional, even
though this might not function correctly.

Having an #ifdef here makes the code more complicated and confusing, for the
benefit of a case which cannot occur.

Thanks,
Mark.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Will Deacon [mailto:will.deacon@xxxxxxx] 
> Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2018 11:45 PM
> To: Nixiaoming <nixiaoming@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx; ard.biesheuvel@xxxxxxxxxx; marc.zyngier@xxxxxxx; james.morse@xxxxxxx; kristina.martsenko@xxxxxxx; steve.capper@xxxxxxx; tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; mingo@xxxxxxxxxx; hpa@xxxxxxxxx; akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; vbabka@xxxxxxx; mhocko@xxxxxxxx; dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx; kirill.shutemov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; zhang.jia@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; schwidefsky@xxxxxxxxxx; heiko.carstens@xxxxxxxxxx; gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; x86@xxxxxxxxxx; linux-s390@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] arm64:add missing CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX for mark_rodata_ro
> 
> On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 09:36:15PM +0800, nixiaoming wrote:
> > mark_rodata_ro is only called by the function mark_readonly when
> > CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX=y,
> > if CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX is not set
> > a compile warning may be triggered: unused function
> 
> How are you achieving this configuration? In our Kconfig we select this
> unconditionally.
> 
> Will