From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: pavel@ucw.cz (Pavel Machek) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 11:00:03 +0200 Subject: [PATCHv3 11/11] arm64: docs: document pointer authentication In-Reply-To: <86h8o3r5jy.wl-marc.zyngier@arm.com> References: <20180417183735.56985-1-mark.rutland@arm.com> <20180417183735.56985-12-mark.rutland@arm.com> <20180422080520.GC17875@amd> <86h8o3r5jy.wl-marc.zyngier@arm.com> Message-ID: <20180422090003.GA24344@amd> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Sun 2018-04-22 09:47:29, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On Sun, 22 Apr 2018 09:05:21 +0100, > Pavel Machek wrote: > > > > Hi! > > > > > @@ -205,6 +205,14 @@ Before jumping into the kernel, the following conditions must be met: > > > ICC_SRE_EL2.SRE (bit 0) must be initialised to 0b0. > > > - The DT or ACPI tables must describe a GICv2 interrupt controller. > > > > > > + For CPUs with pointer authentication functionality: > > > + - If EL3 is present: > > > + SCR_EL3.APK (bit 16) must be initialised to 0b1 > > > + SCR_EL3.API (bit 17) must be initialised to 0b1 > > > + - If the kernel is entered at EL1: > > > + HCR_EL2.APK (bit 40) must be initialised to 0b1 > > > + HCR_EL2.API (bit 41) must be initialised to 0b1 > > > + > > > > 0b1 is quite confusing way to write 1. > > Do you find 0x1 equally confusing? It is slightly better. Still I'd not use it for describing single bit. > 0bx is a pretty common way of describing bit-fields of a hardware > register. It is also consistent with the rest of this document. ...and inconsistent with rest of the world :-). Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 181 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: