linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 7/9] arm64: cpufeature: Track user visible fields

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: <1a8ef423-75a9-b3e9-27d8-cf289274613a@arm.com>
Date:   Tue, 10 Jan 2017 14:25:57 +0000
From:   Suzuki K Poulose <Suzuki.Poulose@....com>
To:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
Cc:     linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, mark.rutland@....com,
        ryan.arnold@...aro.org, sid@...erved-bit.com, aph@...hat.com,
        will.deacon@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        adhemerval.zanella@...aro.org, dave.martin@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 7/9] arm64: cpufeature: Track user visible fields

On 10/01/17 14:24, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 05:28:30PM +0000, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
>> Changes since V3:
>>  - Mark ID_AA64ISAR0_EL1:RDM visible
> [...]
>>  static const struct arm64_ftr_bits ftr_id_aa64isar0[] = {
>> -	ARM64_FTR_BITS(FTR_STRICT, FTR_EXACT, ID_AA64ISAR0_RDM_SHIFT, 4, 0),
>> -	ARM64_FTR_BITS(FTR_STRICT, FTR_LOWER_SAFE, ID_AA64ISAR0_ATOMICS_SHIFT, 4, 0),
>> -	ARM64_FTR_BITS(FTR_STRICT, FTR_LOWER_SAFE, ID_AA64ISAR0_CRC32_SHIFT, 4, 0),
>> -	ARM64_FTR_BITS(FTR_STRICT, FTR_LOWER_SAFE, ID_AA64ISAR0_SHA2_SHIFT, 4, 0),
>> -	ARM64_FTR_BITS(FTR_STRICT, FTR_LOWER_SAFE, ID_AA64ISAR0_SHA1_SHIFT, 4, 0),
>> -	ARM64_FTR_BITS(FTR_STRICT, FTR_LOWER_SAFE, ID_AA64ISAR0_AES_SHIFT, 4, 0),
>> +	ARM64_FTR_BITS(FTR_VISIBLE, FTR_STRICT, FTR_EXACT, ID_AA64ISAR0_RDM_SHIFT, 4, 0),
>
> As I said in an earlier reply, I'd like the RDM exposing to come
> together with a patch presenting the corresponding HWCAP bit. But it's
> fine by me if you add the HWCAP separately from this patch, in which
> case my ack still stands.

Catalin,

Yes, I have a separate patch for that.

Thanks
Suzuki