linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cpu, AMD: Fix another bug in the new errata checking code

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 13 May 2011 09:03:59 -0400
From:	Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@....com>
To:	Hans Rosenfeld <hans.rosenfeld@....com>,
	Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@...hat.com>
CC:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Petkov, Borislav" <Borislav.Petkov@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpu, AMD: Fix another bug in the new errata checking
 code

On 05/13/2011 06:21 AM, Hans Rosenfeld wrote:
> On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 07:59:38PM -0400, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> The revision guide states that family 0x10 model 6 stepping 2 has E400.
> So I would expect that OSVW length is>= 2 and that OSVW status has bit
> 1 set, or that OSVW length is<  2. This indicates that the workaround is
> necessary, without any need to check the family-model-stepping ranges.
>
> It would also be correct if the BIOS disabled C1E and cleared the
> corresponding OSVW status bit. Anything else would probably be a very
> nasty BIOS bug.
>
> Could you send me the contents of MSRs 0xc0010140, 0xc0010141 and
> 0xc0010055?

Knowing whether any C state above C1 is declared could be useful too.

-boris

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/