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: <56169284.5070706@arm.com>
Date:	Thu, 8 Oct 2015 16:57:56 +0100
From:	"Suzuki K. Poulose" <Suzuki.Poulose@....com>
To:	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
Cc:	mark.rutland@....com, Vladimir.Murzin@....com,
	steve.capper@...aro.org, ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org,
	marc.zyngier@....com, andre.przywara@....com, will.deacon@....com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, edward.nevill@...aro.org,
	aph@...hat.com, james.morse@....com, dave.martin@....com,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 16/22] arm64/debug: Make use of the system wide safe
 value

On 08/10/15 16:08, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 08, 2015 at 12:56:28PM +0100, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
>> On 08/10/15 12:11, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 06:02:05PM +0100, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
>>>> @@ -137,13 +138,17 @@ extern struct pmu perf_ops_bp;
>>>>   /* Determine number of BRP registers available. */
>>>>   static inline int get_num_brps(void)
>>>>   {
>>>> -	return ((read_cpuid(ID_AA64DFR0_EL1) >> 12) & 0xf) + 1;
>>>> +	return 1 +
>>>> +		cpuid_feature_extract_field(read_system_reg(SYS_ID_AA64DFR0_EL1),
>>>> +						ID_AA64DFR0_BRPS_SHIFT);
>>>>   }
>>>
>>> cpuid_feature_extract_field() is fine but we should we bother with
>>> read_system_reg vs just read_cpuid?
>>> Similar question for patch 17/22.
>>
>> Well, we would have already TAINTed the kernel, if these fields are different.
>> It is just the matter of, whether we want to provide the safer value on a tainted
>> kernel or not. I am open to suggestions.
>
> Ah, sorry, I mixed read_system_reg() with read_cpu_sysreg(). I think we

Oh, ok. I think we should rename it as you suggest below to avoid the
confusion.

> need to rename the latter as it gets confusing. Maybe something like
> read_native_sys_reg() or __raw_read_system_reg().
>


Thanks
Suzuki



--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ