linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v11 4/9] arm64: add conditional instruction simulation support

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: <20160314040455.GB6584@dhcppc6.redhat.com>
Date:	Mon, 14 Mar 2016 09:34:55 +0530
From:	Pratyush Anand <panand@...hat.com>
To:	Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>
Cc:	David Long <dave.long@...aro.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	Sandeepa Prabhu <sandeepa.s.prabhu@...il.com>,
	William Cohen <wcohen@...hat.com>,
	Steve Capper <steve.capper@...aro.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Dave P Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Robin Murphy <Robin.Murphy@....com>,
	Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
	Jens Wiklander <jens.wiklander@...aro.org>,
	Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@...aro.org>,
	Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@...aro.org>,
	Yang Shi <yang.shi@...aro.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
	"Suzuki K. Poulose" <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
	Zi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@...il.com>,
	John Blackwood <john.blackwood@...r.com>,
	Feng Kan <fkan@....com>,
	Balamurugan Shanmugam <bshanmugam@....com>,
	James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
	Vladimir Murzin <Vladimir.Murzin@....com>,
	Mark Salyzyn <salyzyn@...roid.com>,
	Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 4/9] arm64: add conditional instruction simulation
 support

On 13/03/2016:12:09:03 PM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Wed,  9 Mar 2016 00:32:18 -0500
> David Long <dave.long@...aro.org> wrote:
> 
> > +pstate_check_t * const opcode_condition_checks[16] = {
> > +	__check_eq, __check_ne, __check_cs, __check_cc,
> > +	__check_mi, __check_pl, __check_vs, __check_vc,
> > +	__check_hi, __check_ls, __check_ge, __check_lt,
> > +	__check_gt, __check_le, __check_al, __check_al
> 
> The very last entry seems wrong, or is at least the opposite of what
> the current code has. It should be something called __check_nv(), and
> always return false (condition code NEVER).

May be __check_nv() name is more appropriate as per definition, but shouldn't it
still return true, because TRM says:
"The condition code NV exists only to provide a valid disassembly of the 0b1111
encoding, otherwise its behavior is identical to AL"

~Pratyush