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: <87shbkx4fq.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>
Date:   Fri, 05 Jan 2018 06:25:29 +0100
From:   Florian Weimer <fw@...eb.enyo.de>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        Arjan Van De Ven <arjan.van.de.ven@...el.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] IBRS patch series

* Linus Torvalds:

> On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 9:56 AM, Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>>
>> Speculation on Skylake and later requires these patches ("dynamic IBRS")
>> be used instead of retpoline[1].
>
> Can somebody explain this part?
>
> I was assuming that retpoline would work around this issue on all uarchs.
>
> This seems to say "retpoline does nothing on Skylake+"

Retpoline also looks incompatible with CET, so future Intel CPUs will
eventually need a different approach anyway.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ