linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] x86/mm: optimize static

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 7 Sep 2018 08:26:31 +0000
From:   "Yang, Bin" <bin.yang@...el.com>
To:     "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>
CC:     "mingo@...nel.org" <mingo@...nel.org>,
        "hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
        "Gross, Mark" <mark.gross@...el.com>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
        "Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] x86/mm: optimize static_protection() by using
 overlap()

On Fri, 2018-09-07 at 10:21 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Sep 2018, Yang, Bin wrote:
> > On Fri, 2018-09-07 at 09:49 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > On Fri, 7 Sep 2018, Yang, Bin wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 2018-09-04 at 14:22 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > I just write a test.c to compare the result between overlap() and
> > > > original within().
> > > 
> > > You are right. Your version of doing the overlap exclusive works. I misread
> > > the conditions. I still prefer doing inclusive checks because they are way
> > > more obvious.
> > 
> > I am sorry for my poor english. What is "inclusive checks"?
> 
> Exlusive:    val >= start && val < end
> 
> Inclusive:   val >= start && val <= end
> 
> So the difference is that you feed exclusive with:
> 
>    end = start + size
> 
> and inclusive with
> 
>   end = start + size - 1
> 

Thanks. I will change it to inclusive check.

> Thanks,
> 
> 	tglx
> 
>