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:   Sun, 17 Jun 2018 14:22:01 -0400
From:   Keno Fischer <keno@...iacomputing.com>
To:     Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
        Kyle Huey <khuey@...ehuey.com>,
        "Robert O'Callahan" <robert@...llahan.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] x86/arch_prctl: Add ARCH_SET_XCR0 to mask XCR0 per-thread

> Almost difference in CPU behavior
> between the replayer and the replayee.

Not sure what happened to this sentence.
What I meant to say was:

Almost any difference in CPU behavior between
the replayer and the replayee will cause problems
for the determinism of the trace.

To elaborate on this, even if a register whose content
differs between the recording and the replay, it can
still cause problems down the line, e.g. if it is spilled
to the stack and that stack address is then re-used later.
In order for rr to work, we basically rely on the CPU
behaving *exactly* the same during the record and the
replay (down to counting performance counters the same).
This works well, but there are corner cases (like this XCR0
one).

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ