linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 11/14] arm64: Move the ASID allocator code in a separate file

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 13:52:02 +0100
From:   Julien Grall <julien.grall@....com>
To:     Guo Ren <guoren@...nel.org>
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

Hi Guo,

On 19/06/2019 12:51, Guo Ren wrote:
> 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.

I will let Will answer to this.

[...]

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

Will emits concern to move the code in lib. So I will stick with what I 
currently have.

Cheers,

-- 
Julien Grall