linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/4] docs/arm64: cpu-feature-registers: Documents missing visible fields

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

Date:   Thu, 31 Oct 2019 17:15:30 +0000
From:   Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To:     Julien Grall <julien.grall@....com>
Cc:     linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        will@...nel.org, Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
        "julien@....org" <julien@....org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] docs/arm64: cpu-feature-registers: Documents missing
 visible fields

On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 04:48:18PM +0000, Julien Grall wrote:
> On 03/10/2019 12:12, Julien Grall wrote:
> > A couple of fields visible to userspace are not described in the
> > documentation. So update it.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Julien Grall <julien.grall@....com>
> > ---
> >   Documentation/arm64/cpu-feature-registers.rst | 4 ++++
> >   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/arm64/cpu-feature-registers.rst b/Documentation/arm64/cpu-feature-registers.rst
> > index 2955287e9acc..ffcf4e2c71ef 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/arm64/cpu-feature-registers.rst
> > +++ b/Documentation/arm64/cpu-feature-registers.rst
> > @@ -193,6 +193,10 @@ infrastructure:
> >        +------------------------------+---------+---------+
> >        | Name                         |  bits   | visible |
> >        +------------------------------+---------+---------+
> > +     | SB                           | [36-39] |    y    |
> > +     +------------------------------+---------+---------+
> > +     | FRINTTS                      | [32-35] |    y    |
> > +     +------------------------------+---------+---------+
> 
> Will reported the bitfields were inconsistent (see [1]). Looking in more
> details, it seems that I messed up this patch when sending it (I honestly
> can't remember why I wrote like that :().
> 
> @Catalin, I saw you applied this patch to for-next/elf-hwcap-docs. Would you
> mind to update the content of the patch? Or do you prefer a new version?

Please send a fix on top of the elf-hwcap-docs branch. I'd prefer not to
rebase it.

-- 
Catalin