[PATCH] linux: Add mseal syscall support

[Adhemerval Zanella Netto]

On 10/10/25 16:41, Collin Funk wrote:
> Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> writes:
> 
>> +      if (errno == ENOSYS)
>> +        FAIL_UNSUPPORTED
>> +          ("kernel does not support memory protection keys");
>> +      if (errno == EINVAL)
>> +        FAIL_UNSUPPORTED
>> +          ("CPU does not support memory protection keys: %m");
> 
> Do any other syscalls fail with different errno's depending on if the
> kernel or the CPU do not support them? I feel like it is better to use
> ENOSYS in both cases, but maybe I am missing something.

I am trying to recall why I had to add this on previous version, I had the
impression that was because on 32-bit kernels the syscall might return it
but double checking it does return ENOSYS in this case as well.

I will remove this check.

> 
> Also, for formatting long lines like this I think the following looks
> better:
> 
>       FAIL_UNSUPPORTED ("CPU does not support "
>                         "memory protection keys: %m");
> 
> Collin

Ack, I will double check the size.