From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D95653858D39 for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2021 13:34:35 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org D95653858D39 Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-219-FuMpWTmSN_6aS_dDGTzjYA-1; Mon, 15 Nov 2021 08:34:32 -0500 X-MC-Unique: FuMpWTmSN_6aS_dDGTzjYA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7D3E0102CB31; Mon, 15 Nov 2021 13:34:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from oldenburg.str.redhat.com (unknown [10.39.194.81]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6722060C21; Mon, 15 Nov 2021 13:34:28 +0000 (UTC) From: Florian Weimer To: "H.J. Lu" Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org, Joseph Myers , "Kirill A . Shutemov" , Szabolcs Nagy , Adhemerval Zanella , Sunil K Pandey Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 0/1] RFC: Add References: <20210924165338.2326917-1-hjl.tools@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2021 14:34:26 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20210924165338.2326917-1-hjl.tools@gmail.com> (H. J. Lu's message of "Fri, 24 Sep 2021 09:53:37 -0700") Message-ID: <87mtm5h7a5.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.14 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NONE, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: libc-alpha@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Libc-alpha mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2021 13:34:38 -0000 * H. J. Lu: > By default, the number of the address bits used in address translation > is the number of address bits. But it can be changed by ARM Top-byte > Ignore (TBI) or Intel Linear Address Masking (LAM). > > provides an API for tagged address manipulation. H.J., we had an off-list discussion regarding this, and I want to double-check if my recollection of the conclusion is correct. Basically, we said that we would try to enable HWSAN on x86-64 as well (using Intel LAM) *without* glibc changes or a new ABI. Once we have a better understanding of how address tagging is used/could be used by applications, we plan to define a general-purpose programming interface for it. Thanks, Florian