linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 0/10] x86/xsaves: Fix XSAVES known issues

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Fri, 29 Apr 2016 21:43:38 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:	Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@...el.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
	Sai Praneeth Prakhya <sai.praneeth.prakhya@...el.com>,
	"Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
	Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/10] x86/xsaves: Fix XSAVES known issues


* Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com> wrote:

> Hi Folks,
> 
> I've heard through the grapevine that there's some concern that we
> should not be bothering to enable XSAVES because there's not a
> sufficient use case for it. [...]

So I have no fundamental objections against this series - I didn't apply it back 
in March because not all patches had your Reviewed-by tag. Basically after you 
sorted out all the XSAVE dynamic feature detection/sizing issues I was a happy 
camper and have no objection against XSAVES.

Could you please send a refreshed version against the latestest tip:master?

Thanks,

	Ingo