[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Yqr/qBeIbLZYzgXi@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2022 12:02:16 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, x86@...nel.org,
Kostya Serebryany <kcc@...gle.com>,
Andrey Ryabinin <ryabinin.a.a@...il.com>,
Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...il.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
"H . J . Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 5/8] x86/uaccess: Provide untagged_addr() and remove
tags before address check
On Fri, Jun 10, 2022 at 05:35:24PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
> +/*
> + * Mask out tag bits from the address.
> + *
> + * Magic with the 'sign' allows to untag userspace pointer without any branches
> + * while leaving kernel addresses intact.
> + */
> +#define untagged_addr(mm, addr) ({ \
> + u64 __addr = (__force u64)(addr); \
> + s64 sign = (s64)__addr >> 63; \
> + __addr ^= sign; \
> + __addr &= (mm)->context.untag_mask; \
> + __addr ^= sign; \
> + (__force __typeof__(addr))__addr; \
> +})
Can't we make that mask a constant and *always* unmask U57 irrespective
of LAM being on?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists