linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/6] arm64: Add tlbi_user

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: <67ac92a2-d37b-d472-3cbc-0bc855235c3f@huawei.com>
Date:   Mon, 25 May 2020 14:57:58 +0800
From:   Zhenyu Ye <yezhenyu2@...wei.com>
To:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
CC:     <peterz@...radead.org>, <mark.rutland@....com>, <will@...nel.org>,
        <aneesh.kumar@...ux.ibm.com>, <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        <npiggin@...il.com>, <arnd@...db.de>, <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        <maz@...nel.org>, <suzuki.poulose@....com>, <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        <yuzhao@...gle.com>, <Dave.Martin@....com>, <steven.price@....com>,
        <broonie@...nel.org>, <guohanjun@...wei.com>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-mm@...ck.org>, <arm@...nel.org>, <xiexiangyou@...wei.com>,
        <prime.zeng@...ilicon.com>, <zhangshaokun@...ilicon.com>,
        <kuhn.chenqun@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/6] arm64: Add tlbi_user_level TLB invalidation helper

On 2020/5/22 23:49, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 09:56:53PM +0800, Zhenyu Ye wrote:
>> @@ -190,8 +196,8 @@ static inline void flush_tlb_page_nosync(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>>  	unsigned long addr = __TLBI_VADDR(uaddr, ASID(vma->vm_mm));
>>  
>>  	dsb(ishst);
>> -	__tlbi(vale1is, addr);
>> -	__tlbi_user(vale1is, addr);
>> +	__tlbi_level(vale1is, addr, 0);
>> +	__tlbi_user_level(vale1is, addr, 0);
>>  }
> 
> This one remains with a level 0 throughout the series. Is this
> intentional? If we can't guarantee the level here, better to use the
> non-level __tlbi().
> 

OK, I will change it back to non-level __tlbi().

Thanks,
Zhenyu