linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvm-arm tree with the arm64 tree

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]

Message-ID: <Yy2J52TLL7i2laSZ@arm.com>
Date:   Fri, 23 Sep 2022 11:26:47 +0100
From:   Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To:     Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
Cc:     Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Christoffer Dall <cdall@...columbia.edu>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@...ux.dev>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvm-arm tree with the arm64 tree

On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 10:04:30AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Sep 2022 05:05:31 +0100,
> Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > Today's linux-next merge of the kvm-arm tree got a conflict in:
> > 
> >   arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
> > 
> > between commit:
> > 
> >   55adc08d7e64 ("arm64/sysreg: Add _EL1 into ID_AA64PFR0_EL1 definition names")
> > 
> > from the arm64 tree and commit:
> > 
> >   cdd5036d048c ("KVM: arm64: Drop raz parameter from read_id_reg()")
> > 
> > from the kvm-arm tree.
[...]
> Catalin, Will: in order to avoid further conflicts, I've taken the
> liberty to merge the arm64/for-next/sysreg branch into kvmarm/next.
> Let me know if that's a problem.

No problem.

> Also, I've resolved the conflict in a slightly different way. Not that
> the above was wrong in any way, but we might as well fix it in a more
> idiomatic way:
> 
>  	/* We can only differ with CSV[23], and anything else is an error */
>  	val ^= read_id_reg(vcpu, rd);
> -	val &= ~((0xFUL << ID_AA64PFR0_CSV2_SHIFT) |
> -		 (0xFUL << ID_AA64PFR0_CSV3_SHIFT));
> +	val &= ~(ARM64_FEATURE_MASK(ID_AA64PFR0_EL1_CSV2) |
> +		 ARM64_FEATURE_MASK(ID_AA64PFR0_EL1_CSV3));
>  	if (val)
>  		return -EINVAL;

It looks fine, thanks.

-- 
Catalin