linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/4] x86, head_32: Remove second CPUID detection from default

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]

Date:	Mon, 11 Feb 2013 09:21:54 -0800
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] x86, head_32: Remove second CPUID detection from
 default_entry

On 02/11/2013 09:15 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 07:49:14AM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> What about CPUs with inconsistent cpuid levels? Yes, they can and do
>> happen, as we discussed on IRC.
>
> Yes, this should still work. We're doing the EFLAGS.ID dance right at
> the beginning of default_entry on each cpu and cache cpuld level in
> new_cpu_data for the time we're in this code.
>
> What this particular patch removes is the yet-another EFLAGS.ID dance
> which we IMHO unnecessarily did after enabling paging.
>
> So basically nothing changes wrt handling inconsistent cpuid levels and
> MSR mis-programming - we still should be taking care of those cases.
>

Cool.  I misread your 0/4 cover and hadn't quite dug into the details yet.

	-hpa


-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.

--
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/