linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 06/20] powerpc/8xx: Fix size given to set_huge_pte

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: <37987c7b-e9e1-4969-82b3-84da47b2c6ff@csgroup.eu>
Date: Wed, 22 May 2024 08:45:06 +0000
From: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>
To: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>
CC: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>, Andrew Morton
	<akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>, Peter Xu
	<peterx@...hat.com>, Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>, "linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org"
	<linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 06/20] powerpc/8xx: Fix size given to
 set_huge_pte_at()



Le 20/05/2024 à 19:42, Oscar Salvador a écrit :
> On Mon, May 20, 2024 at 04:31:39PM +0000, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>> Hi Oscar, hi Michael,
>>
>> Le 20/05/2024 à 11:14, Oscar Salvador a écrit :
>>> On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 09:00:00PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>>>> set_huge_pte_at() expects the real page size, not the psize which is
>>>
>>> "expects the size of the huge page" sounds bettter?
>>
>> Parameter 'pzize' already provides the size of the hugepage, but not in
>> the way set_huge_pte_at() expects it.
>>
>> psize has one of the values defined by MMU_PAGE_XXX macros defined in
>> arch/powerpc/include/asm/mmu.h while set_huge_pte_at() expects the size
>> as a value.
> 
> Yes, psize is an index, which is not a size by itself but used to get
> mmu_psize_def.shift to see the actual size, I guess.
> This is why I thought that being explicit about "expects the size of the
> huge page" was better.
> 
> But no strong feelings here.
> 

Thanks, I'll try a rephrase.

Christophe