linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/cpu: Fix SMAP check in PVOPS environments

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:	Thu, 04 Jun 2015 13:29:19 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
	Xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xen.org>
CC:	David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
	Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
	lguest@...ts.ozlabs.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/cpu: Fix SMAP check in PVOPS environments

On 06/04/2015 12:55 PM, Rusty Russell wrote:
> 
> Yeah, hard cases make bad law.
> 
> I'm not too unhappy with this fix; ideally we'd rename save_fl and
> restore_fl to save_eflags_if and restore_eflags_if too.
> 

I would be fine with this... but please document what the bloody
semantics of pvops is actually supposed to be.

	-hpa


--
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/