[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <B8AC3E80E903784988AB3003E3E97330C0063816@dggemm510-mbs.china.huawei.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2017 07:18:45 +0000
From: "Liuwenliang (Abbott Liu)" <liuwenliang@...wei.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>
CC: "linux@...linux.org.uk" <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
"aryabinin@...tuozzo.com" <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
"afzal.mohd.ma@...il.com" <afzal.mohd.ma@...il.com>,
"f.fainelli@...il.com" <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
"labbott@...hat.com" <labbott@...hat.com>,
"kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
"mhocko@...e.com" <mhocko@...e.com>,
"cdall@...aro.org" <cdall@...aro.org>,
"catalin.marinas@....com" <catalin.marinas@....com>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"mawilcox@...rosoft.com" <mawilcox@...rosoft.com>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"thgarnie@...gle.com" <thgarnie@...gle.com>,
"keescook@...omium.org" <keescook@...omium.org>,
"arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>,
"vladimir.murzin@....com" <vladimir.murzin@....com>,
"tixy@...aro.org" <tixy@...aro.org>,
"ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org" <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
"robin.murphy@....com" <robin.murphy@....com>,
"mingo@...nel.org" <mingo@...nel.org>,
"grygorii.strashko@...aro.org" <grygorii.strashko@...aro.org>,
"glider@...gle.com" <glider@...gle.com>,
"dvyukov@...gle.com" <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
"opendmb@...il.com" <opendmb@...il.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"kasan-dev@...glegroups.com" <kasan-dev@...glegroups.com>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Jiazhenghua <jiazhenghua@...wei.com>,
Dailei <dylix.dailei@...wei.com>,
Zengweilin <zengweilin@...wei.com>,
Heshaoliang <heshaoliang@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/11] Initialize the mapping of KASan shadow memory
On 16/11/17 22:41 Marc Zyngier [mailto:marc.zyngier@....com] wrote:
>No, it doesn't. It cannot work, because Cortex-A9 predates the invention
>of the 64bit accessor. I suspect that you are testing stuff in QEMU,
>which is giving you a SW model that always supports LPAE. I suggest you
>test this code on *real* HW, and not only on QEMU.
I am sorry. My test is fault. I only defined TTBR0 as __ACCESS_CP15_64,
but I don't use the definition TTBR0 as __ACCESS_CP15_64.
Now I use the definition TTBR0 as __ACCESS_CP15_64 on CPU supporting
LPAE(vexpress_a9), I find it doesn't work and report undefined instruction error
when execute "mrrc" instruction.
So, you are right that 64bit accessor of TTBR0 cannot work on LPAE.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists