linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] proc: added ept

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: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1808011954410.1835@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date:   Wed, 1 Aug 2018 20:07:55 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Peter Shier <pshier@...gle.com>
cc:     mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com, x86@...nel.org, bp@...e.de,
        konrad.wilk@...cle.com, dwmw@...zon.co.uk,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Peter Feiner <pfeiner@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] proc: added ept_ad flag to /proc/cpuinfo

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

On Wed, 1 Aug 2018, Peter Shier wrote:

> Thank you Thomas. Wording issues understood and will post a new patch
> with updated subject.
> 
> Re goals: purpose is to expose feature bit with side effect of
> "ept_ad" in /proc/cpuinfo and is not necessarily related to VMX code.
> 
> We are upstreaming some internal patches that we think would be
> generally useful and I will be careful from now on to remove any
> wording that is not publicly relevant.

Well, it does not matter what your goals are. If you add new functionality
and there is an indication that it might be useful in other places, then
looking into that is not really optional. Kernel development works because
people work together and look over the brim of their own tea cup, otherwise
we would end up with a unmaintainable steaming pile of s....

'Not my goal' surely does not qualify as a proper answer to a sensible
technical question.

Thanks,

	tglx