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: <CAEX_ruGcWOYuhF6Gtm0a9kh8JsUvZzRLxzi8Q982iiWA2ioYpg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 12 Oct 2018 10:20:25 +0100
From:   Samuel Neves <sneves@....uc.pt>
To:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Cc:     kristen@...ux.intel.com,
        Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, bp@...en8.de,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        "the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: entry: flush the cache if syscall error

On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 8:25 PM Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> wrote:
> What exactly is this trying to protect against?  And how many cycles
> should we expect L1D_FLUSH to take?

As far as I could measure, I got 1660 cycles per wrmsr 0x10b, 0x1 on a
Skylake chip, and 1220 cycles on a Skylake-SP.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ