linux-kernel - Re: [RFT PATCH v3 13/27] arm64: Add Apple vendor-specific system registers

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]

Date:   Fri, 26 Mar 2021 15:23:30 +0900
From:   Hector Martin <marcan@...can.st>
To:     Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc:     linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>,
        Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
        Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@...all.nl>,
        Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
        Mohamed Mediouni <mohamed.mediouni@...amail.com>,
        Stan Skowronek <stan@...ellium.com>,
        Alexander Graf <graf@...zon.com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFT PATCH v3 13/27] arm64: Add Apple vendor-specific system
 registers

On 25/03/2021 04.04, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 06:59:21PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
>> So far we've kept arch/arm64/ largely devoid of IMP-DEF bits, and it
>> seems a shame to add something with the sole purpose of collating that,
>> especially given arch code shouldn't need to touch these if FW and
>> bootloader have done their jobs right.
>>
>> Can we put the definitions in the relevant drivers? That would sidestep
>> any pain with MAINTAINERS, too.
> 
> If we can genuinely ignore these in arch code, then sure. I just don't know
> how long that is going to be the case, and ending up in a situation where
> these are scattered randomly throughout the tree sounds horrible to me.

I thought we would need some in KVM code, but given the direction Marc's 
series ended up in, it seems we won't. So I'm happy keeping these in the 
respective drivers; if this ends up being messy in the future it 
shouldn't be a big deal to refactor it all into one file again.

-- 
Hector Martin (marcan@...can.st)
Public Key: https://mrcn.st/pub