linux-kernel - Re: 2.6.26, PAT and AMD family 6

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: <20080507072431.30abefae@infradead.org>
Date:	Wed, 7 May 2008 07:24:31 -0700
From:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
To:	Rene Herman <rene.herman@...access.nl>
Cc:	Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 2.6.26, PAT and AMD family 6

On Wed, 07 May 2008 16:09:05 +0200
Rene Herman <rene.herman@...access.nl> wrote:


[as for which cpus]

The errata docs have these errata, at least for Intel I know they're
there. We can add back older cpus over time, but again.. think of it as
a risk/reward thing ;( Right now, breaking all kinds of well working
older systems without benefits on the upside..... that's not very
popular on lkml. Once PAT is rock solid I hope we can relax this check
greatly...

> A blacklist would be a better idea I feel, but in ANY case I think
> it's really bad form to clear the feature flag. They are provided by
> hardware; if arch/x86/mm/pat.c won't risk running except on a select
> few tested models, whatever, but my /proc/cpuinfo shouldn't be lying
> to me.

we filter those for all kinds of things already, sorry.
What good is showing "pat" if "pat" isn't deemed usable (yet)????
Now *that* is deception :)
> 
> Rene.
--
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/