linux-kernel - Re: [RFC, PATCHv1 00/28] 5-level paging

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20161208192045.GA30380@node.shutemov.name>
Date:   Thu, 8 Dec 2016 22:20:45 +0300
From:   "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
        "linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCHv1 00/28] 5-level paging

On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 10:16:07AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 8:21 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov
> <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > This patchset is still very early. There are a number of things missing
> > that we have to do before asking anyone to merge it (listed below).
> > It would be great if folks can start testing applications now (in QEMU) to
> > look for breakage.
> > Any early comments on the design or the patches would be appreciated as
> > well.
> 
> Looks ok to me. Starting off with a compile-time config option seems fine.
> 
> I do think that the x86 cpuid part should (patch 15) should be the
> first patch, so that we see "la57" as a capability in /proc/cpuinfo
> whether it's being enabled or not? We should merge that part
> regardless of any mm patches, I think.

Okay, I'll split up the CPUID part into separate patch and move it
beginning for the patchset

REQUIRED_MASK portion will stay where it is.

-- 
 Kirill A. Shutemov