linux-kernel - Re: [RESEND PATCH 2/2] arm64: make WANT_HUGE_PMD_SHARE depends on HUGETLB

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]

Date:   Fri, 16 Dec 2016 17:10:05 +0800
From:   zhong jiang <zhongjiang@...wei.com>
To:     <catalin.marinas@....com>, <will.deacon@....com>,
        <rrichter@...ium.com>, <mark.rutland@....com>, <arnd@...db.de>,
        <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>, <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        <dwoods@...hip.com>, <jeremy.linton@....com>
CC:     <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH 2/2] arm64: make WANT_HUGE_PMD_SHARE depends on
 HUGETLB_PAGE

On 2016/12/14 22:19, zhongjiang wrote:
> From: zhong jiang <zhongjiang@...wei.com>
>
> when HUGETLB_PAGE is disable, WANT_HUGE_PMD_SHARE contains the
> fuctions should not be use. therefore, we add the dependency.
>
> Signed-off-by: zhong jiang <zhongjiang@...wei.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/Kconfig | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> index 969ef88..694ca73 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> @@ -640,6 +640,7 @@ config SYS_SUPPORTS_HUGETLBFS
>  
>  config ARCH_WANT_HUGE_PMD_SHARE
>  	def_bool y if ARM64_4K_PAGES || (ARM64_16K_PAGES && !ARM64_VA_BITS_36)
> +	depends on HUGETLB_PAGE
>  
>  config ARCH_HAS_CACHE_LINE_SIZE
>  	def_bool y
Hi,
      I still think it is a issue. Perhaps above changelog is unclear.  Further explain is as follows.
 when hugetlb_pages is disable and arch_want_huge_pmd_share is enable,   we maybe call
 huge_pmd_sahre in hugetlbpage.c, but the function actually is not definition as it is not
 exported.  is it right ??

Thanks
zhongjiang