[0/2] A couple of cleanups on top of for-next/e0pd

Message

Will Deacon Jan. 15, 2020, 2:28 p.m. UTC

Hi Mark,

I've queued the E0PD patches for 5.6 (thanks!), but in reading them a
final time I noticed a couple of cleanups that I think we can make to
kaslr_requires_kpti(). I don't have a TX1 to test them on, but I think
the logic is sound.

Please take a look, as I'd like to queue these on top.

Thanks.

Will

Cc: Catalin Marinas <[e-mail]>
Cc: Suzuki K Poulose <[e-mail]>
Cc: Marc Zyngier <[e-mail]>

--->8

Will Deacon (2):
  arm64: Simplify early check for broken TX1 when KASLR is enabled
  arm64: Use register field helper in kaslr_requires_kpti()

 arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 21 +++++++--------------
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)

Comments

Catalin Marinas Jan. 15, 2020, 3:11 p.m. UTC | #1

On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 02:28:58PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> Will Deacon (2):
>   arm64: Simplify early check for broken TX1 when KASLR is enabled
>   arm64: Use register field helper in kaslr_requires_kpti()

The clean-ups look fine to me. With the latest patches we never call
kaslr_requires_kpti() after arm64_const_caps_ready has been set.

Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas <[e-mail]>

Suzuki K Poulose Jan. 15, 2020, 4:47 p.m. UTC | #2

On 15/01/2020 14:28, Will Deacon wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> 
> I've queued the E0PD patches for 5.6 (thanks!), but in reading them a
> final time I noticed a couple of cleanups that I think we can make to
> kaslr_requires_kpti(). I don't have a TX1 to test them on, but I think
> the logic is sound.
> 
> Please take a look, as I'd like to queue these on top.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Will
> 
> Cc: Catalin Marinas <[e-mail]>
> Cc: Suzuki K Poulose <[e-mail]>
> Cc: Marc Zyngier <[e-mail]>

Looks good to me.

Acked-by: Suzuki K Poulose <[e-mail]>