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: <c2dd1a34-c97a-3865-cd5e-ccc4877bfe3e@arm.com>
Date:	Mon, 1 Aug 2016 14:53:28 +0100
From:	Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
To:	"kwangwoo.lee@...com" <kwangwoo.lee@...com>,
	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Cc:	"hyunchul3.kim@...com" <hyunchul3.kim@...com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"woosuk.chung@...com" <woosuk.chung@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] arm64: mm: convert __dma_* routines to use start, size

On 01/08/16 14:36, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 01/08/16 00:45, kwangwoo.lee@...com wrote:
> [...]
>>>>> -----8<-----
>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/assembler.h
>>>>> b/arch/arm64/include/asm/assembler.h
>>>>> index 10b017c4bdd8..1c005c90387e 100644
>>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/assembler.h
>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/assembler.h
>>>>> @@ -261,7 +261,16 @@ lr	.req	x30		// link register
>>>>>  	add	\size, \kaddr, \size
>>>>>  	sub	\tmp2, \tmp1, #1
>>>>>  	bic	\kaddr, \kaddr, \tmp2
>>>>> -9998:	dc	\op, \kaddr
>>>>> +9998:
>>>>> +	.ifeqs "\op", "cvac"
>>>>> +alternative_if_not ARM64_WORKAROUND_CLEAN_CACHE
>>>>> +	dc	cvac, \kaddr
>>>>> +alternative_else
>>>>> +	dc	civac, \kaddr
>>>>> +alternative_endif
>>>>> +	.else
>>>>> +	dc	\op, \kaddr
>>>>> +	.endif
>>>>>  	add	\kaddr, \kaddr, \tmp1
>>>>>  	cmp	\kaddr, \size
>>>>>  	b.lo	9998b
>>>>
>>>> I agree that it looks not viable because it makes the macro bigger and
>>>> conditional specifically with CVAC op.
>>>
>>> Actually, having had a poke around in the resulting disassembly, it
>>> looks like this does work correctly. I can't think of a viable reason
>>> for the whole dcache_by_line_op to ever be wrapped in yet another
>>> alternative (which almost certainly would go horribly wrong), and it
>>> would mean that any other future users are automatically covered for
>>> free. It's just horrible to look at at the source level.
>>
>> Then, Are you going to send a patch for this? Or should I include this change?
> 
> I'll do a bit more testing just to make sure, then spin a separate patch
> (and try to remember to keep you on CC..)

...and said patch turns out to conflict with 823066d9edcd, since I
hadn't realised it's already been fixed! So you can go ahead with the
dcache_by_line_op cleanup as well, just rebase onto arm64/for-next/core
(or linux/master, since it's been pulled already).

Robin.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ