linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] vdso: Introduce vdso/page.h

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: <9C51DD25-3BEE-4E95-8E2C-F94C1B75F95B@zytor.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2024 09:05:58 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@....com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux-Arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org
CC: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "Jason A . Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>,
        Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>, Naveen N Rao <naveen@...nel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] vdso: Introduce vdso/page.h

On October 7, 2024 4:20:23 AM PDT, Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@....com> wrote:
>
>
>On 07/10/2024 12:06, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 7, 2024, at 11:01, Vincenzo Frascino wrote:
>>> On 04/10/2024 14:13, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> 
>>>
>>> It seemed harmless from the tests I did. But adding an '&&
>>> defined(CONFIG_32BIT)' makes it logically correct. I will add a comment as well
>>> in the next version.
>> 
>> To clarify: this has to be "!defined(CONFIG_64BIT)", as most
>> 32-bit architectures don't define the CONFIG_32BIT symbol
>> (but all 64-bit ones define CONFIG_64BIT).
>> 
>
>You are right, it seemed that every 32-bit architectures with a
>64-bit phys_addr_t had CONFIG_32BIT but this is not the case.
>
>>     Arnd
>

Maybe we should have CONFIG_32BIT as a global?