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: <AANLkTimjep+H2VDJC1sFvT52XPmiKgMHuRBirzNm6qnL@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 27 Sep 2010 10:10:40 -0700
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@...assic.park.msu.ru>
Cc:	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, rth@...ddle.net,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Matt Turner <mattst88@...il.com>
Subject: Re: alpha: potential race around hae_cache in RESTORE_ALL

On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 9:26 AM, Ivan Kokshaysky
<ink@...assic.park.msu.ru> wrote:
>
> Looks like we need to drop HAE bits from SAVE_ALL/RESTORE_ALL, which
> benefits (1) and automatically fixes (3), and do the entire IO sequences
> in (2) with disabled interrupts (if HAE is involved).

No can do.

HAE is used in user space too (the X server), and it depends on the
kernel restoring HAE over interrupts and system calls, afaik.

I'm also pretty certain that all SMP machines either don't have HAE at
all, or have a per-CPU HAE in hardware (and then it's possible that we
screw it up in software, of course). Anything else would be too broken
for words. Can somebody find documentation saying otherwise?

                        Linus
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ