linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1] arm64: tlb: fix the TTL value of tlb_get

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, 24 Jun 2021 09:29:15 +0100
From:   Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
To:     Zhenyu Ye <yezhenyu2@...wei.com>
Cc:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        aneesh.kumar@...ux.ibm.com, Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
        steven.price@....com, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        Xiexiangyou <xiexiangyou@...wei.com>, liushixin2@...wei.com,
        huyaqin <huyaqin1@...wei.com>, zhurui3@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] arm64: tlb: fix the TTL value of tlb_get_level

On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 09:55:53AM +0800, Zhenyu Ye wrote:
> On 2021/6/23 19:04, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 03:05:22PM +0800, Zhenyu Ye wrote:
> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlb.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlb.h
> >> index 61c97d3b58c7..c995d1f4594f 100644
> >> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlb.h
> >> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlb.h
> >> @@ -28,6 +28,10 @@ static void tlb_flush(struct mmu_gather *tlb);
> >>   */
> >>  static inline int tlb_get_level(struct mmu_gather *tlb)
> >>  {
> >> +	/* The TTL field is only valid for the leaf entry. */
> >> +	if (tlb->freed_tables)
> >> +		return 0;
> >> +
> >>  	if (tlb->cleared_ptes && !(tlb->cleared_pmds ||
> >>  				   tlb->cleared_puds ||
> >>  				   tlb->cleared_p4ds))
> > 
> > Thanks. I can't see a better way around this, so I'll queue the patch.
> > The stage-2 page-table code looks ok afaict, but please can you check it
> > too?
> 
> The stage-2 page-table codes seem to be correct to me.

Thanks for having a look.

Will