linux-kernel - [PATCH RFC 0/2] x86/fpu: avoid "xstate_fault" in xsave_user/xrestore

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:	Sun, 15 Mar 2015 17:49:48 +0100
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Pekka Riikonen <priikone@....fi>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Suresh Siddha <sbsiddha@...il.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
	Quentin Casasnovas <quentin.casasnovas@...cle.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: [PATCH RFC 0/2] x86/fpu: avoid "xstate_fault" in
	xsave_user/xrestore_user

Hello.

Another a bit off-topic change, but I'd like to finish the discussion
with Quentin.

And almost cosmetic. But I added the RFC tag to make it clear that this
needs a review from someone who understands gcc-asm better. In particular
I am worried if that dummy "=m" (*buf) is actually correct.

And I agree with Quentin, user_insn/check_insn can be improved to allow
clobbers, more flexible "output", etc. But imo they already can make this
code look a bit better, and "xstate_fault" must die eventually.

Quentin, could you review? I can't find your last email about this change,
and I can't recall if you agree or not.

Oleg.

--
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/