linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: Use static keys for CPU features

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 2 Sep 2016 17:07:06 +0100
From:   Suzuki K Poulose <Suzuki.Poulose@....com>
To:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
Cc:     linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: Use static keys for CPU features

On 02/09/16 16:52, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 10:22:13AM +0100, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
>> On 25/08/16 18:26, Catalin Marinas wrote:

>>
>> Just a heads up. I have a patch [1] which moves the "check_local_cpu_errata()"
>> around to smp_prepare_boot_cpu(). This patch should still work fine with that
>> case. Only that may be we could move the jump_lable_init() to smp_prepare_boot_cpu(),
>> before we call "update_cpu_errata_work_arounds()" for Boot CPU.
>
> IIUC, we wouldn't call update_cpu_errata_work_arounds() until the CPU
> feature infrastructure is initialised via cpuinfo_store_boot_cpu(). So
> I don't think moving the jump_label_init() call above is necessary.

Right, as I said, your patch should work fine even with that change. Its just that,
jump_label_init() (a generic kernel setup) can be called from a better visible
place (smp_prepare_boot_cpu()) than from a less interesting place with the patch
below.

Cheers
Suzuki


>
>> [1] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1471525832-21209-4-git-send-email-suzuki.poulose@arm.com
>