linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] MIPS: update tlb even if pte entry has no change

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]

Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.21.2005141426160.6492@redsun52.ssa.fujisawa.hgst.com>
Date:   Thu, 14 May 2020 14:34:26 +0100 (BST)
From:   "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@....com>
To:     Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>
cc:     Bibo Mao <maobibo@...ngson.cn>,
        Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Paul Burton <paulburton@...nel.org>,
        Dmitry Korotin <dkorotin@...ecomp.com>,
        Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@...at.org>,
        Stafford Horne <shorne@...il.com>,
        Steven Price <steven.price@....com>,
        Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...ux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MIPS: update tlb even if pte entry has no change

On Thu, 14 May 2020, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:

> >> If there are two threads reading the same memory and tlb miss happens,
> >> one thread fills pte entry, the other reads new pte value during page fault
> >> handling. PTE value may be updated before page faul, so the process need
> > 
> >     Fault.
> 
>     And "needs".
> 
> >> need update tlb still.
> 
>     Oh, and one "need" is enough. :-)

 Hmm, "the process need update" looks right to me (compare "the process 
need not update") as "need" is used as a modal verb in this sentence.  
Alternatively "the process needs to update" could be used (with "need" as 
a main verb, and "to" then).

 I'm not a native English speaker though, so I might be missing a usage 
subtlety here.

 NB I'd be in favour of capitalising "PTE" and "TLB" consistently 
throughout though as the norm is with acronyms.

  Maciej