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: <20180711162850.52jmzsuwegpk7rag@breakpoint.cc>
Date:   Wed, 11 Jul 2018 18:28:51 +0200
From:   Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To:     "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
Cc:     Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, riel@...riel.com,
        dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: Lazy FPU restoration / moving kernel_fpu_end() to context switch

On 2018-06-15 22:33:47 [+0200], Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 8:32 PM Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> wrote:
> > quite in the form you imagined.  The idea that we've tossed around is
> > to restore FPU state on return to user mode.  Roughly, we'd introduce
> > a new thread flag TIF_FPU_UNLOADED (name TBD).
> > prepare_exit_to_usermode() would notice this flag, copy the fpstate to
> > fpregs, and clear the flag.  (Or maybe exit_to_usermode_loop() -- No
> > one has quite thought it through, but I think it should be outside the
> > loop.)  We'd update all the FPU accessors to understand the flag.
> 
> Yes! This is exactly what I was thinking. Then those calls to begin()
> and end() could be placed as close to the actual FPU usage as
> possible.

I was thinking about this myself. Did anyone try to hack something in
the meantime? I might want to look into this, too :)

Sebastian

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ