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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2022 10:37:08 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> To: Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...uxfoundation.org>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, Dave Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Guo Ren <guoren@...nel.org>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] munmap() vs unmap_mapping_range() On Fri, Jul 08, 2022 at 09:18:02AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > Hi, > > These 4 patches implement the suggestion by Linus. > > The first patch nukes all architecture implementations of tlb_{start,end}_vma() > by adding two additional MMU_GATHER config knobs. > > DaveM, please clarify the sparc64 case, it seems a little odd to have > flush_cache_range() but to explicitly not call it at unmap time. It would be > nice to remove this one special case. > > The second patch isn't strictly needed for this series but since I was looking > at all this, I figured C-SKY didn't make a whole lot of sense. Guo, please > have a look. > > The third patch cleans up the #ifdeffery and provides a single > tlb_{start,end}_vma() implementation for everyone. > > The fourth, and final, patch does the force TLB-flush on VM_PFNMAP thing. > > I've had the first three patches exposed to the robots and they've (so far) not > reported build (or other) fail. > What are we doing with these patches? Andrew will you pick them up, or will I smuggle them in x86/mm or something ?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists