Re: [PATCHv3 0/8] Linear Address Masking enabling

[Edgecombe, Rick P]

On Fri, 2022-06-17 at 02:43 +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> 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.

Ah right. I was thinking more the part about which syscalls support
tagged addresses:

https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/arm64/tagged-address-abi.html#id1

Some mention kernel versions where they changed. Just thinking it could
get complex to track which HW features support which syscalls for which
kernel versions.