linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2 6/6] coresight-stm: adding driver for CoreSight STM component

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:	Fri, 05 Feb 2016 15:06:20 +0200
From:	Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Chunyan Zhang <zhang.chunyan@...aro.org>,
	mathieu.poirier@...aro.org
Cc:	robh@...nel.org, broonie@...nel.org, pratikp@...eaurora.org,
	nicolas.guion@...com, corbet@....net, mark.rutland@....com,
	mike.leach@....com, tor@...com, al.grant@....com,
	zhang.lyra@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 6/6] coresight-stm: adding driver for CoreSight STM component

Chunyan Zhang <zhang.chunyan@...aro.org> writes:

> +#ifndef CONFIG_64BIT
> +static inline void __raw_writeq(u64 val, volatile void __iomem *addr)
> +{
> +	asm volatile("strd %1, %0"
> +		     : "+Qo" (*(volatile u64 __force *)addr)
> +		     : "r" (val));
> +}

Is it really ok to do this for all !64bit arms, inside a driver, just
like that? I'm not an expert, but I'm pretty sure there's more to it.

Regards,
--
Alex