linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 9/9] x86/xsaves: Re-enable XSAVES

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: <20160302004834.GA30942@test-lenovo>
Date:	Tue, 1 Mar 2016 16:48:34 -0800
From:	Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@...el.com>
To:	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:	x86@...nel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
	Sai Praneeth Prakhya <sai.praneeth.prakhya@...el.com>,
	"Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
	Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 9/9] x86/xsaves: Re-enable XSAVES

On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 04:45:41PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> >>> +	WARN_ONCE((xfeatures_mask & XFEATURE_MASK_SUPERVISOR),
> >>> +		"x86/fpu: XSAVES supervisor states are not yet implemented.\n");
> >>> +
> >>>  	cr4_set_bits(X86_CR4_OSXSAVE);
> >>>  	xsetbv(XCR_XFEATURE_ENABLED_MASK, xfeatures_mask);
> >>>  }
> >>
> >> Let's also do a:
> >>
> >> 	xfeatures_mask &= ~XFEATURE_MASK_SUPERVISOR;
> >>
> >> Otherwise, we have a broken system at the moment.
> >>
> > Currently, if anyone sets any supervisor state in xfeatures_mask, the
> > kernel prints out the warning then goes into a protection fault.
> > That is a very strong indication to the user. Do we want to mute it? 
> 
> By "goes into a protection fault", do you mean that it doesn't boot?
> 
> I'd just rather we put the kernel in a known-safe configuration (masking
> supervisor state out of xfeatures_mask) rather than rely on the general
> protection fault continuing to be generated by whatever is generating it.
> 
Ok.

Yu-cheng