linux-kernel - Re: [all better] Re: regression: massive trouble with fpu rework

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: <20150629093504.GA20600@gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 29 Jun 2015 11:35:04 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc:	Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
	Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Dave Hansen <dave@...1.net>
Subject: Re: [all better] Re: regression: massive trouble with fpu rework


* Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 10:25:29AM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Mon, 2015-06-29 at 08:40 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > *
> > > Ok, so could you please move the fpu__init_system() further up and see which 
> > > position is that starts breaking with the BIOS option set?
> > > 
> > > here's the current, broken layout of the code:
> > > 
> > >         get_cpu_cap(c);
> > > [0]     fpu__init_system(c);
> > > 
> > >         if (this_cpu->c_early_init)
> > >                 this_cpu->c_early_init(c);
> 
> > [0] is the only spot that breaks box.
> 
> I bet it is that
> 
>         /* Unmask CPUID levels if masked: */
>         if (c->x86 > 6 || (c->x86 == 6 && c->x86_model >= 0xd)) {
>                 if (msr_clear_bit(MSR_IA32_MISC_ENABLE,
>                                   MSR_IA32_MISC_ENABLE_LIMIT_CPUID_BIT) > 0) {
>                         c->cpuid_level = cpuid_eax(0);
>                         get_cpu_cap(c);
>                 }
>         }
> 
> in early_init_intel(). If you feel like playing, you might comment it
> out to see what happens.
> 
> :-)

Indeed, I bet that makes a difference!

I wish that 'unmasking' logic came with more comments:

  - Why do BIOSen ever mask CPUIDs?

  - Why do we unmask the masking?

  - Why doesn't the kernel keep on working just fine even if certain CPUID aspects 
    are turned off?

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/