linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 3/9] x86/mm/tlb: Open-code on_each_cpu_cond_mask() for tlb_is_not

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: <4B53B286-C718-4ACF-B974-17D700F8D2E1@vmware.com>
Date:   Mon, 22 Jul 2019 19:51:40 +0000
From:   Nadav Amit <namit@...are.com>
To:     Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>
CC:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/9] x86/mm/tlb: Open-code on_each_cpu_cond_mask() for
 tlb_is_not_lazy()

> On Jul 22, 2019, at 12:47 PM, Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk> wrote:
> 
> On 19/07/2019 02.58, Nadav Amit wrote:
> 
>> /*
>> @@ -865,7 +893,7 @@ void arch_tlbbatch_flush(struct arch_tlbflush_unmap_batch *batch)
>> 	if (cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, &batch->cpumask)) {
>> 		lockdep_assert_irqs_enabled();
>> 		local_irq_disable();
>> -		flush_tlb_func_local(&full_flush_tlb_info);
>> +		flush_tlb_func_local((void *)&full_flush_tlb_info);
>> 		local_irq_enable();
>> 	}
> 
> I think the confusion could be cleared up if you moved this hunk to
> patch 2 where it belongs - i.e. where you change the prototype of
> flush_tlb_func_local() and hence introduce the warning.

Yes, there is a small mess here - the constification should actually go
to a different patch… I’ll fix it.