linux-kernel - Re: FSGSBASE ABI considerations

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:   Mon, 31 Jul 2017 07:16:13 -0700
From:   Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
To:     "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
Cc:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        "Bae, Chang Seok" <chang.seok.bae@...el.com>,
        X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bpetkov@...e.de>,
        Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>, Stas Sergeev <stsp@...t.ru>
Subject: Re: FSGSBASE ABI considerations

On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:55 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov
<kirill@...temov.name> wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 08:05:43PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> Hi all-
>>
>> Chang wants to get the FSGSBASE patches in.  Here's a bit on a brain
>> dump on what I think the relevant considerations are and why I haven't
>> sent out my patches.
>
> I'm not sure if it would be relevant input for the descussion, but there's
> another issue with FSGSBASE vs LA57:
>
> http://lkml.kernel.org/r/9ddf602b-6c8b-8c1e-ab46-07ed12366593@redhat.com

Clearly we should support FSGSBASE on Linux, have Paolo blacklist it
on LA57 machines, and get Java to start using it just to pressure
Intel to clean up this mess.

Sigh, the degree to which CPU engineers don't understand software is
sometimes mind-boggling.