linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 18/33] Subarch support for CPUID instruction

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]

Message-Id: <1153219128.3038.55.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org>
Date:	Tue, 18 Jul 2006 12:38:48 +0200
From:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
To:	Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@...cam.ac.uk>
Cc:	virtualization@...ts.osdl.org,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
	xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com, Ian Pratt <ian.pratt@...source.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 18/33] Subarch support for CPUID instruction

On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 11:26 +0100, Keir Fraser wrote:
> On 18 Jul 2006, at 11:14, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> 
> >> Allow subarchitectures to modify the CPUID instruction.  This allows
> >> the subarch to provide a limited set of CPUID feature flags during CPU
> >> identification.  Add a subarch implementation for Xen that traps to 
> >> the
> >> hypervisor where unsupported feature flags can be hidden from guests.
> >
> > I'm wondering if this is entirely the wrong level of abstraction; to me
> > it feels the subarch shouldn't override the actual cpuid, but the cpu
> > feature flags that linux uses. That's a lot less messy: cpuid has many
> > many pieces of information which are near impossible to filter in
> > practice, however filtering the USAGE of it is trivial; linux basically
> > flattens the cpuid namespace into a simple bitmap of "what the kernel
> > can use". That is really what the subarch should filter/fixup, just 
> > like
> > we do for cpu quirks etc etc.
> 
> Maybe we should have that *as well*, but it makes sense to allow the 
> hypervisor to apply a filter too. For example, whether it supports PSE, 
> FXSAVE/FXRSTOR, etc. These are things the 'platform' is telling the OS 
> -- not something the OS can filter for itself.

To some degree "Xen" is just a magic type of cpu that can/should have a
quirk to filter these out... it just feels wrong and fragile to me to do
it via a cpuid filter... once you have the "other" filter as I suggested
I bet the need for the cpuid filter just goes away...


-
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/