linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arm64/mm: Compute PTRS_PER_[PMD|PUD] independently of PTRS_PER

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: <YmKxehhwVIzVo3Di@arm.com>
Date:   Fri, 22 Apr 2022 14:45:30 +0100
From:   Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To:     Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>
Cc:     linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64/mm: Compute PTRS_PER_[PMD|PUD] independently of
 PTRS_PER_PTE

On Fri, Apr 08, 2022 at 09:40:09AM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> Possible page table entries (or pointers) on non-zero page table levels are
> dependent on a single page size i.e PAGE_SIZE and size required for each
> individual page table entry i.e 8 bytes. PTRS_PER_[PMD|PUD] as such are not
> related to PTRS_PER_PTE in any manner, as being implied currently. So lets
> just make this very explicit and compute these macros independently.

OTOH, we have lots of other assumptions about pmd etc. being updated
using the pte macros. Anyway, I'm fine with this.

-- 
Catalin