linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 1/3] x86/mm/pat: Disable preemption around __flush_tlb

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: <903c4734c77f4fbaba8598bc2effaf78@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date:   Wed, 17 Oct 2018 11:45:59 +0000
From:   David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To:     'Sebastian Andrzej Siewior' <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
CC:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/3] x86/mm/pat: Disable preemption around
 __flush_tlb_all()

From: 'Sebastian Andrzej Siewior'
> Sent: 17 October 2018 11:39
> On 2018-10-17 09:54:38 [+0000], David Laight wrote:
> > Can it make any sense to flush the tlb with preemption enabled?
> it might. Usually it is disabled for other reasons.

That's what I mean, it should be disabled by the caller.

> > Surely preemption must be disabled over something else as well?
> In this case it is due to the CR3 reload. I don't see anything else.

Right, so it should be disabled before the CR3 reload and enabled after?

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)