linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86/fpu: math_state_restore() should not blindly disable irqs

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:	Fri, 6 Mar 2015 15:17:50 +0100
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>
Cc:	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Pekka Riikonen <priikone@....fi>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Suresh Siddha <sbsiddha@...il.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
	Quentin Casasnovas <quentin.casasnovas@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86/fpu: math_state_restore() should not blindly
	disable irqs

On 03/06, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> On 03/06, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > How about the patch from David Vrabel? That seems to solve the
> > irq-disable problem too, right?
>
> I wasn't cc'ed, I guess you mean
>
> 	[PATCHv4] x86, fpu: remove the logic of non-eager fpu mem allocation at the first usage
> 	http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=142564237705311&w=2
>
> Not sure I understand it correctly after the first quick look, but
>
> 1. It conflicts with the recent changes in tip/x86/fpu
>
> 2. fpu_ini() initializes current->thread.fpu.state. This looks unneeded,
>    the kernel threads no longer have FPU context and do not abuse CPU.
>
> 3. I can be easily wrong, but it looks buggy... Note that
>    arch_dup_task_struct() doesn't allocate child->fpu.state if
>    !tsk_used_math(parent).
>
> Add David...
>
> No, I do not think this patch is a good idea. Perhaps I am wrong, but I
> think we need other changes. And they should start from init_fpu().

But the change in eager_fpu_init_bp() looks good (on top of tip/x86/fpu),
at least I was going to do the same ;)

In any case, I do not think this patch can target -stable.

Oleg.

--
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/