On Wed, 26 Apr 2006, Keir Fraser wrote:
>
> We cannot use pte_clear() unless we redefine it for PAE. Currently it reduces
> to set_pte() which explicitly uses the wrong ordering (sets high *then* low,
> because it's normally used to introduce a mapping).
I overlooked that reversal completely. What a very good point.
I think that actually pte_clear() _does_ need to be redefined for PAE,
to reverse that ordering as you point out. Take a look at its use in
mm/highmem.c (where a comment states it's safe against speculative
execution, but a comment can't guarantee that!): what do you think?
Hugh
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
