linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86-64: adjust pmd

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-Id: <455B5892.76E4.0078.0@novell.com>
Date:	Wed, 15 Nov 2006 17:12:34 +0000
From:	"Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@...ell.com>
To:	"Hugh Dickins" <hugh@...itas.com>
Cc:	"Andi Kleen" <ak@...e.de>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<patches@...-64.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86-64: adjust pmd_bad()

>>> Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com> 15.11.06 18:01 >>>
>On Wed, 15 Nov 2006, Jan Beulich wrote:
>
>> Make pmd_bad() symmetrical to pgd_bad() and pud_bad(). At once,
>> simplify them all.
>
>Symmetrical and simpler, yes, but you're weakening the pmd_bad() test:
>no longer requires that all those _KERNPG_TABLE bits be set.  Wouldn't
>it be better to go the other way and strengthen pgd_bad, pud_bad?

Maybe, but there must have been a reason for not doing so. It could
certainly be a follow-up patch - if it works.

Jan
-
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/