linux-kernel - Re: [tip:x86/cpu] x86, cpu: Fix X86_FEATURE

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 5 Oct 2010 18:53:56 +0200
From:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:	hpa@...or.com, linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...hat.com,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, ryan@...osecc.com,
	tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [tip:x86/cpu] x86, cpu: Fix X86_FEATURE_NOPL

From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>
Date: Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 09:30:37AM -0700

> On 10/5/2010 2:47 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> >
> >tag it for -stable too?
> >
> 
> What is the flaw that justifies it for stable, or even .36?  It
> seems relatively harmless, with at most a very minor performance
> issue, unless I'm missing something?

I was thinking more along the lines of this being partially broken
when supplying non-constant arguments to cpu_has(), something like
<arch/x86/kernel/cpu/proc.c:show_cpuinfo()>, for example. But all this
could cause is /proc/cpuinfo not to report the "nopl" feature bit. I
guess this is too minor an issue to even to be considered for stable.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
--
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/