[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87sgh2l0q4.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2020 15:07:31 +0200
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Balbir Singh <sblbir@...zon.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: jpoimboe@...hat.com, tony.luck@...el.com, keescook@...omium.org,
benh@...nel.crashing.org, x86@...nel.org, dave.hansen@...el.com,
Balbir Singh <sblbir@...zon.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] arch/x86/mm: Refactor cond_ibpb() to support other use cases
Balbir Singh <sblbir@...zon.com> writes:
>
> /*
> - * Use bit 0 to mangle the TIF_SPEC_IB state into the mm pointer which is
> - * stored in cpu_tlb_state.last_user_mm_ibpb.
> + * Bits to mangle the TIF_SPEC_IB state into the mm pointer which is
> + * stored in cpu_tlb_state.last_user_mm_spec.
> */
> #define LAST_USER_MM_IBPB 0x1UL
> +#define LAST_USER_MM_SPEC_MASK (LAST_USER_MM_IBPB)
>
> /* Reinitialize tlbstate. */
> - this_cpu_write(cpu_tlbstate.last_user_mm_ibpb, LAST_USER_MM_IBPB);
> + this_cpu_write(cpu_tlbstate.last_user_mm_spec, LAST_USER_MM_IBPB);
Shouldn't that be LAST_USER_MM_MASK?
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists