linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/16] uaccess: add untagged

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: <CAAeHK+xtFwY+S0VY-yyb+i_+GnSjYHfgYHB9Ss=r9xxZZvsKFw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 4 Jun 2019 13:46:56 +0200
From:   Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc:     Khalid Aziz <khalid.aziz@...cle.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Paul Burton <paul.burton@...s.com>,
        James Hogan <jhogan@...nel.org>,
        Yoshinori Sato <ysato@...rs.sourceforge.jp>,
        Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, linux-sh@...r.kernel.org,
        sparclinux@...r.kernel.org,
        PowerPC <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        "the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/16] uaccess: add untagged_addr definition for other arches

On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 9:27 AM Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 09:16:08AM -0600, Khalid Aziz wrote:
> > Could you reword above sentence? We are already starting off with
> > untagged_addr() not being no-op for arm64 and sparc64. It will expand
> > further potentially. So something more along the lines of "Define it as
> > noop for architectures that do not support memory tagging". The first
> > paragraph in the log can also be rewritten to be not specific to arm64.
>
> Well, as of this patch this actually is a no-op for everyone.
>
> Linus, what do you think of applying this patch (maybe with a slightly
> fixed up commit log) to 5.2-rc so that we remove a cross dependency
> between the series?

(I have adjusted the patch description and have just sent it out
separately from the series).