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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2013 12:03:19 +1100 From: Michael Ellerman <michael@...erman.id.au> To: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org, Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>, Anshuman Khandual <khandual@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/9][v5] powerpc: implement is_instr_load_store(). On Tue, 2013-10-08 at 12:31 -0700, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote: > Michael Ellerman [michael@...erman.id.au] wrote: > | bool is_load_store(int ext_opcode) > | { > | upper = ext_opcode >> 5; > | lower = ext_opcode & 0x1f; > | > | /* Short circuit as many misses as we can */ > | if (lower < 3 || lower > 23) > | return false; > > I see some loads/stores like these which are not covered by > the above check. Is it ok to ignore them ? > > lower == 29: ldepx, stdepx, eviddepx, evstddepx > > lower == 31: lwepx, lbepx, lfdepx, stfdepx, Those are the external process ID instructions, which I've never heard of anyone using, I think we can ignore them. > Looking through the opcode maps, I also see these for primary > op code 4: > > evldd, evlddx, evldwx, evldw, evldh, evldhx. > > Should we include those also ? Yes I think so. I didn't check any of the other opcodes for you. cheers -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists