linux-kernel - RE: Linux patch disabling AVX when eagerfpu is turned off

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: <00f901d15491$71ae6260$550b2720$@ravellosystems.com>
Date:	Thu, 21 Jan 2016 23:19:39 +0200
From:	"Leonid Shatz" <leonid.shatz@...ellosystems.com>
To:	"'Yu-cheng Yu'" <yu-cheng.yu@...el.com>,
	"'H. Peter Anvin'" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	"'Ingo Molnar'" <mingo@...nel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"'Andy Lutomirski'" <luto@...capital.net>,
	"'Borislav Petkov'" <bp@...en8.de>,
	"'Dave Hansen'" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
	"'Fenghua Yu'" <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
	"'Linus Torvalds'" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"'Oleg Nesterov'" <oleg@...hat.com>,
	"'Peter Zijlstra'" <peterz@...radead.org>,
	"'Quentin Casasnovas'" <quentin.casasnovas@...cle.com>,
	"'Ravi V. Shankar'" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
	"'Sai Praneeth Prakhya'" <sai.praneeth.prakhya@...el.com>,
	"'Thomas Gleixner'" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	<liran.alon@...ellosystems.com>,
	<mendel.aizner@...ellosystems.com>,
	"'Elazar Leibovich'" <elazar.leibovich@...ellosystems.com>,
	"'Eyal Moscovici'" <eyal.moscovici@...ellosystems.com>,
	<gil.hoffer@...ellosystems.com>
Subject: RE: Linux patch disabling AVX when eagerfpu is turned off - possibly not required

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 01:08:18PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> On 01/21/16 13:03, Yu-cheng Yu wrote:
>> > Hello Leonid,
>> > 
>> > You are probably right. Let me check this and get back to you.
>> > 
>> > Thanks,
>> > Yu-cheng
>> > 
>> 
>> The hardware people have gotten back to us and this inconsistency in 
>> the SDM is unintentional (other places in the SDM has it correctly.)  
>> So we should revert this patch.
>> 
>> 	-hpa
>> 
>Agree. Thanks Peter and Leonid!

Thank you all for your feedback and clarifications. That's was my assumption
that SDM was somewhat misleading, but I was not %100 sure about it. It could
be nice, though to see future releases of SDM taking this issue in account.

Leonid