linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86, fpu: correct XSAVE xstate size calculation

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]

Message-ID: <20150822132131.GA3982@gmail.com>
Date:	Sat, 22 Aug 2015 15:21:31 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	Dave Hansen <dave@...1.net>
Cc:	dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	bp@...en8.de, fenghua.yu@...el.com, hpa@...or.com, x86@...nel.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
	Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, fpu: correct XSAVE xstate size calculation


* Dave Hansen <dave@...1.net> wrote:

> On 08/08/2015 02:06 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >>> What sense does it make to have a blob we don't know the exact layout of? How will 
> >>> > > debuggers or user-space in general be able to print (and change) the register 
> >>> > > values if they don't know the layout?
> >> > 
> >> > Ingo, we know the layout.  We know where every component is.  We know
> >> > how big each component is.  This patch does not change the fact that we
> >> > calculate and store that.
> > The patch you submitted blindly trusts the CPU, and I'm uneasy about that for 
> > multiple reasons. We can and should do better than that, while still flexibly 
> > making use of all CPU capabilities that are offered.
> 
> Yes, it blindly trusts the CPU.  This is precisely* what the *existing*
> code has done since commit dc1e35c6e95 got merged in 2008.  Do you have
> some specific concern with the compact format that makes you want to
> stop blindly trusting the CPU after 7 years?

Yes, the fact that 'compact format' probably never worked well and we had to 
revert use of it.

> I know what you want now (I've coded up half of it already), but I've not got 
> the foggiest idea why other than pure paranoia.

There were multiple bugs in this code so some amount of paranoia is justified.

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/