linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] powerpc 8xx: Fixing issue with CONFIG_PIN

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: <1378944911.4066.12.camel@pasglop>
Date:	Thu, 12 Sep 2013 10:15:11 +1000
From:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To:	Scott Wood <scottwood@...escale.com>
Cc:	Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc 8xx: Fixing issue with CONFIG_PIN_TLB

On Wed, 2013-09-11 at 17:36 -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> I wonder why we don't start from entry 31 so we can actually make use of
> that autodecrement.  What will happen when we load the first normal TLB
> entry later on?  I don't see any setting of SPRN_MD_CTR after this code,
> so won't it overwrite entry 30 (the middle 8M) in the CONFIG_PIN_TLB
> case?
> 
> Ben, would patches like this be considered bugfixes as far as merging
> goes, or would they be for next given that it's something that's never
> really worked right and hasn't been touched in years?

Since they don't affect anything outside of 8xx, I'm happy to take them
until around -rc2 or 3. But it's your call really.

Cheers,
Ben.


--
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/