From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63DE1C43334 for ; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 23:43:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id CD8F06B0071; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 19:43:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id C88776B0072; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 19:43:57 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id B03856B0073; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 19:43:57 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0015.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.15]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CCF96B0071 for ; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 19:43:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin08.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7533B6087D for ; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 23:43:57 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79585729314.08.5ABC9FF Received: from mga06.intel.com (mga06b.intel.com [134.134.136.31]) by imf01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCF4B400B0 for ; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 23:43:54 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1655423034; x=1686959034; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=gvd8jlhw50cWYlW87KaSp82+5jOEFw1C0vFTcwNzk9I=; b=a835JN7YoO43ryhv6SgBOtq5MoeLdh/YCDPuNzpUkz4xydG5jK5n5hEI LoJkf3vEJ5XzxGPH/AwKTdkIIdUenGz6u0ZZ1ps6cxMosZrt000/d9/Zu /Y3t6Ue5Q3C3ZeESgTXJpIwyuH2622SNXUMigowHWPmFm1egGpEI4h8Zy E+jAZOut+U+8pcP/PZ8zMu3erFF3Lz1xjZel4MGXga8js/3yMs/gVIlbo E+4HMH3zHX+wAf4Ka7seVyz3u/0UUHnDlub16paeUrFbQhaTA8xw3455I gycZSwqq6nTIxhimMvd10pdcIR+TWBjoRzp3d0Om4iIQcLzQa0KOTtH2a A==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6400,9594,10380"; a="341034320" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.92,306,1650956400"; d="scan'208";a="341034320" Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21]) by orsmga104.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Jun 2022 16:43:51 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.92,306,1650956400"; d="scan'208";a="576182859" Received: from black.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.28]) by orsmga002.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 16 Jun 2022 16:43:47 -0700 Received: by black.fi.intel.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 473B5109; Fri, 17 Jun 2022 02:43:52 +0300 (EEST) Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2022 02:43:52 +0300 From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" To: "Edgecombe, Rick P" Cc: "peterz@infradead.org" , "Lutomirski, Andy" , "dave.hansen@linux.intel.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "hjl.tools@gmail.com" , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "kcc@google.com" , "andreyknvl@gmail.com" , "ak@linux.intel.com" , "dvyukov@google.com" , "x86@kernel.org" , "ryabinin.a.a@gmail.com" , "glider@google.com" Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 0/8] Linear Address Masking enabling Message-ID: <20220616234352.2h4f64a4fw46atrs@black.fi.intel.com> References: <20220610143527.22974-1-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1655423037; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=FsxVyML+hFrydbsuV7Qf38c/bwdlU4zOuEAmiaU/3qp5KufQChoqF4+TBvZNA1aSH6wrpb Ol155nOEsAGUsjjrlb2iPhdQyV01dwhlnmZL44YwHkFuMV6waH0jAraZqn/QYeZdmG1pcj H5Z99gf4g9Jm5hne2Hl41d5g3jU0jug= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1655423037; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=o+BO/xnLdE8RGMMBtzovyw+DSvtFeQyUJsztJzSZq+g=; b=3sUDHT3uzR0ypINBHthH6fCu3J5ggAPP7Zwo8UTxiFWSpaYtDTdjfilnlu1WpABzYsNb4E Vc2COWbX2zCVMRtAaFuZp8Y92n6RcRle+FS3+ww3Myx2Bu1gtZwaR+APoZbA+EH3tP2aB2 a3yU40StCCHRM0YQYjV50QTl5dltjmI= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf01.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=intel.com header.s=Intel header.b=a835JN7Y; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=intel.com; spf=none (imf01.hostedemail.com: domain of kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com has no SPF policy when checking 134.134.136.31) smtp.mailfrom=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: imf01.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=intel.com header.s=Intel header.b=a835JN7Y; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=intel.com; spf=none (imf01.hostedemail.com: domain of kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com has no SPF policy when checking 134.134.136.31) smtp.mailfrom=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam09 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: CCF4B400B0 X-Stat-Signature: esbcruu1afniaqrjfiitmtonf4cmzaw7 X-HE-Tag: 1655423034-874121 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 10:52:14PM +0000, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote: > On Fri, 2022-06-10 at 17:35 +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > Linear Address Masking[1] (LAM) modifies the checking that is applied > > to > > 64-bit linear addresses, allowing software to use of the untranslated > > address bits for metadata. > > > > The patchset brings support for LAM for userspace addresses. > > Arm has this documentation about which memory operations support being > passed tagged pointers, and which do not: > Documentation/arm64/tagged-address-abi.rst > > Is the idea that LAM would have something similar, or exactly mirror > the arm ABI? It seems like it is the same right now. Should the docs be > generalized? It is somewhat similar, but not exact. ARM TBI interface implies tag size and placement. ARM TBI is per-thread and LAM is per-process. -- Kirill A. Shutemov