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: <20180126140759.GT5862@e103592.cambridge.arm.com>
Date:   Fri, 26 Jan 2018 14:08:00 +0000
From:   Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>
To:     Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>
Cc:     linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, mark.rutland@....com,
        ckadabi@...eaurora.org, ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org,
        marc.zyngier@....com, catalin.marinas@....com, will.deacon@....com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jnair@...iumnetworks.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/16] arm64: Add helpers for checking CPU MIDR against a
 range

On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 12:28:05PM +0000, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> Add helpers for checking if the given CPU midr falls in a range
> of variants/revisions for a given model.

This doesn't describe what the patch does: instead, helpers are being
added for checking whether an MIDR falls in one of multiple affected
model(s) and or revision(s) here.

Doing this makes logical sense, but is it really worth it?

We might save 100-200 bytes in the kernel image for now, but a common
workaround for errata on multiple unrelated cpus is surely a rare case.

Only if there are many such lists, or if the lists become large does
this start to seem a clear win.

[...]

Cheers
---Dave

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ