On Fri, 8 May 2026 16:55:14 +0100 "Kiryl Shutsemau (Meta)" <[email protected]> wrote:
> The uffd-wp PTE bit is about to gain a second consumer: userfaultfd > RWP will use the same bit to mark access-tracking PTEs, distinct > from mprotect(PROT_NONE) or NUMA-hinting PTEs. WP vs RWP semantics > come from the VMA flag; the bit is just "uffd has claimed this > entry." Drop the "_wp" suffix from the arch-private bit macros so > they reflect that. > > x86: _PAGE_BIT_UFFD_WP -> _PAGE_BIT_UFFD > _PAGE_UFFD_WP -> _PAGE_UFFD > _PAGE_SWP_UFFD_WP -> _PAGE_SWP_UFFD > arm64: PTE_UFFD_WP -> PTE_UFFD > PTE_SWP_UFFD_WP -> PTE_SWP_UFFD > riscv: _PAGE_UFFD_WP -> _PAGE_UFFD > _PAGE_SWP_UFFD_WP -> _PAGE_SWP_UFFD > > Pure mechanical rename -- no behavior change. > > Signed-off-by: Kiryl Shutsemau <[email protected]> > Assisted-by: Claude:claude-opus-4-6 > Reviewed-by: Mike Rapoport (Microsoft) <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: SeongJae Park <[email protected]> Thanks, SJ [...]
