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]
Date:   Wed, 19 Jun 2019 19:51:03 +0800
From:   Guo Ren <guoren@...nel.org>
To:     Julien Grall <julien.grall@....com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu, aou@...s.berkeley.edu,
        gary@...yguo.net, Atish.Patra@....com, hch@...radead.org,
        paul.walmsley@...ive.com, rppt@...ux.ibm.com,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, Anup Patel <anup.Patel@....com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...ive.com>, suzuki.poulose@....com,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>, catalin.marinas@....com,
        julien.thierry@....com, will.deacon@....com,
        christoffer.dall@....com, james.morse@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 11/14] arm64: Move the ASID allocator code in a
 separate file

On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 4:54 PM Julien Grall <julien.grall@....com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 6/19/19 9:07 AM, Guo Ren wrote:
> > Hi Julien,
>
> Hi,
>
> >
> > You forgot CCing C-SKY folks :P
>
> I wasn't aware you could be interested :).
>
> >
> > Move arm asid allocator code in a generic one is a agood idea, I've
> > made a patchset for C-SKY and test is on processing, See:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-csky/1560930553-26502-1-git-send-email-guoren@kernel.org/
> >
> > If you plan to seperate it into generic one, I could co-work with you.
>
> Was the ASID allocator work out of box on C-Sky?
Almost done, but one question:
arm64 remove the code in switch_mm:
  cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, mm_cpumask(prev));
  cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, mm_cpumask(next));

Why? Although arm64 cache operations could affect all harts with CTC
method of interconnect, I think we should
keep these code for primitive integrity in linux. Because cpu_bitmap
is in mm_struct instead of mm->context.

In current csky's patches I've also removed the codes the same as
arm64, but I'll add it back at next version.

> If so, I can easily move the code in a generic place (maybe lib/asid.c).
I think it's OK.

Best Regards
 Guo Ren

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ