linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86: x86_{phys,virt}

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]

Message-ID: <48D272F9.3090001@zytor.com>
Date:	Thu, 18 Sep 2008 08:25:45 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...ell.com>
CC:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, tglx@...utronix.de,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: x86_{phys,virt}_bits field also for i386 (v3)

Jan Beulich wrote:
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
> +	if (cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_PAE) || cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_PSE36))
> +		c->x86_phys_bits = 36;
> +#endif
>  }
>  

I'm confused about this.

There is no reason for this to be #ifdef'd; but it should be conditional 
on this information not being otherwise available (which will always be 
the case on 64 bits), I would assume.  If we are setting a value there, 
we should presumably also set 32 in the other case.

	-hpa
--
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/