linux-kernel - Re: [RFC Patch v1 45/55] ARC: unaligned access emulation

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: <50D2E8BB.6000108@synopsys.com>
Date:	Thu, 20 Dec 2012 16:00:19 +0530
From:	Vineet Gupta <Vineet.Gupta1@...opsys.com>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
CC:	<linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<tglx@...utronix.de>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Subject: Re: [RFC Patch v1 45/55] ARC: unaligned access emulation

On Thursday 20 December 2012 12:29 PM, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> On Monday 12 November 2012 07:30 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> On Monday 12 November 2012, Vineet.Gupta1@...opsys.com wrote:
>>> +
>>> +config ARC_MISALIGN_ACCESS
>>> +       bool "Emulate unaligned memory access (userspace only)"
>>> +       default N
>>> +       help
>>> +         This enables misaligned 16 & 32 bit memory access from user space.
>>> +         Use ONLY-IF-ABS-NECESSARY as it will be very slow and also can hide
>>> +         potential bugs in code
>>
>> parisc and ia64 both have the same feature, and they use sysctl to configure
>> it at run-time. Maybe you should pick one of the two sysctl implementations
>> and hook that up to your implementation as well.
> 
> Sounds like a good idea.
> 
> Looking at your suggestion, the sysctl interface in both of those is for
> slightly different semantics and ARC would possibly need a bit from
> both. So to avoid duplication, I'm proposing following changes to
> kernel/sysctl.c and the generic options selected by respective arches.
> 
> * no_unaligned_warning:CONFIG_IA64 => CONFIG_SYSCTL_ARCH_UNALIGN_NO_WARN
> *unaligned_enabled: __hppa__ => CONFIG_SYSCTL_ARCH_UNALIGN_ALLOW
> 
> If you can think of better(smaller) names, please do let me know :-)
> 
> If we agree in principle, I'll cookup the patches and seek the ACKs from
> ARCH maintainers (assuming my CC list above is right). And to keep
> things simple, we can route the kernel/sysctl.c changes via the ARC
> submission tree.
> 
> Thx,
> Vineet
> 

Sorry for a naive patch submitter question (yes I've already read
SubmittingPatches and googled much already). A lot of times, I see the
"Cc: ..." lines, just below the "Signed-off-by:" lines in the patch -
e.g. https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/10/4/318
Are those added manually - because none of the xxx-cc options to
format-patch or send-email seem to be doing that - unless I missed some.

Context: I have the patch which touches ia64/parisc which I want to send
out and at the same time have those "Cc: lines for the maintainers too"

Thx,
-Vineet

* It's OK to "look" fool once - rather than actually "being" a fool rest
of your life !
--
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/