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: <5772A263.2050503@arm.com>
Date:	Tue, 28 Jun 2016 17:14:27 +0100
From:	Suzuki K Poulose <Suzuki.Poulose@....com>
To:	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
Cc:	will.deacon@....com, mark.rutland@....com, steve.capper@...aro.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	"edward.nevill@...aro.org" <edward.nevill@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] arm64: cpuinfo: Expose MIDR_EL1 and REVIDR_EL1 to
 sysfs

On 28/06/16 16:33, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 12:12:36PM +0100, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
>> +#define CPUINFO_ATTR_RO(_name)							\
>> +	static ssize_t show_##_name(struct device *dev,				\
>> +			struct device_attribute *attr, char *buf)		\
>> +	{									\
>> +		struct cpuinfo_arm64 *info = &per_cpu(cpu_data, dev->id);	\
>> +										\
>> +		if (info->reg_midr)						\
>> +			return sprintf(buf, "0x%016x\n", info->reg_##_name);	\
>> +		else								\
>> +			return 0;						\
>> +	}									\
>> +	static DEVICE_ATTR(_name, 0444, show_##_name, NULL)
>> +
>> +CPUINFO_ATTR_RO(midr);
>> +CPUINFO_ATTR_RO(revidr);
>
> Since exposing these values is aimed at JIT code (and not human
> readable), wouldn't it make more sense to present the binary value
> instead of the ascii transformation?

I am fine with either.

Edward,

Do you have any preference ?

Suzuki
  

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ