From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pg0-f70.google.com (mail-pg0-f70.google.com [74.125.83.70]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CBAA6B025F for ; Mon, 14 Aug 2017 12:52:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-pg0-f70.google.com with SMTP id r133so143695155pgr.6 for ; Mon, 14 Aug 2017 09:52:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from foss.arm.com (usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com. [217.140.101.70]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id c8si4883393pli.272.2017.08.14.09.51.59 for ; Mon, 14 Aug 2017 09:51:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2017 17:50:47 +0100 From: Mark Rutland Subject: Re: [kernel-hardening] [PATCH v5 04/10] arm64: Add __flush_tlb_one() Message-ID: <20170814165047.GB23428@leverpostej> References: <20170809200755.11234-1-tycho@docker.com> <20170809200755.11234-5-tycho@docker.com> <20170812112603.GB16374@remoulade> <20170814163536.6njceqc3dip5lrlu@smitten> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170814163536.6njceqc3dip5lrlu@smitten> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Tycho Andersen Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com, Marco Benatto , Juerg Haefliger , Juerg Haefliger On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 10:35:36AM -0600, Tycho Andersen wrote: > Hi Mark, > > On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 12:26:03PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 02:07:49PM -0600, Tycho Andersen wrote: > > > +static inline void __flush_tlb_one(unsigned long addr) > > > +{ > > > + dsb(ishst); > > > + __tlbi(vaae1is, addr >> 12); > > > + dsb(ish); > > > + isb(); > > > +} > > > > Is this going to be called by generic code? > > Yes, it's called in mm/xpfo.c:xpfo_kunmap. > > > It would be nice if we could drop 'kernel' into the name, to make it clear this > > is intended to affect the kernel mappings, which have different maintenance > > requirements to user mappings. > It's named __flush_tlb_one after the x86 (and a few other arches) > function of the same name. I can change it to flush_tlb_kernel_page, > but then we'll need some x86-specific code to map the name as well. > > Maybe since it's called from generic code that's warranted though? > I'll change the implementation for now, let me know what you want to > do about the name. I think it would be preferable to do so, to align with flush_tlb_kernel_range(), which is an existing generic interface. That said, is there any reason not to use flush_tlb_kernel_range() directly? Thanks, Mark. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org