linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/9][v5] powerpc: implement is_instr_load

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 8 Oct 2013 12:31:17 -0700
From:	Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Michael Ellerman <michael@...erman.id.au>
Cc:	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
	Michael Ellerman <michaele@....ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Anshuman Khandual <khandual@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/9][v5] powerpc: implement is_instr_load_store().

Michael Ellerman [michael@...erman.id.au] wrote:
| bool is_load_store(int ext_opcode)
| {
|         upper = ext_opcode >> 5;
|         lower = ext_opcode & 0x1f;
| 
|         /* Short circuit as many misses as we can */
|         if (lower < 3 || lower > 23)
|             return false;

I see some loads/stores like these which are not covered by
the above check. Is it ok to ignore them ?

	lower == 29: ldepx, stdepx, eviddepx, evstddepx

	lower == 31: lwepx, lbepx, lfdepx, stfdepx,

Looking through the opcode maps, I also see these for primary
op code 4:

	evldd, evlddx, evldwx, evldw, evldh, evldhx.

Should we include those also ?

Sukadev

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/