linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v15 14/23] x86/cpu/intel: Clear SGX_LC capability if not enabled in FEATURE

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: <20181105143749.GB2798@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Mon, 5 Nov 2018 16:37:49 +0200
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc:     "maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@...nel.org>,
        Platform Driver <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        sean.j.christopherson@...el.com, nhorman@...hat.com,
        npmccallum@...hat.com, serge.ayoun@...el.com,
        shay.katz-zamir@...el.com, haitao.huang@...el.com,
        mark.shanahan@...el.com,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw@...zon.co.uk>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        davidwang@...oxin.com,
        "Levin, Alexander (Sasha Levin)" <alexander.levin@...izon.com>,
        qianyue.zj@...baba-inc.com,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v15 14/23] x86/cpu/intel: Clear SGX_LC capability if not
 enabled in FEATURE_CONTROL

On Sat, Nov 03, 2018 at 03:15:15PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > @@ -618,6 +618,8 @@ static void detect_sgx(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> >                 setup_clear_cpu_cap(X86_FEATURE_SGX1);
> >                 setup_clear_cpu_cap(X86_FEATURE_SGX2);
> >         }
> > +       if (unsupported || !(fc & FEATURE_CONTROL_SGX_LE_WR))
> > +               setup_clear_cpu_cap(X86_FEATURE_SGX_LC);
> >  }
> 
> A-ha, I see how you use this variable here (though it's still possible
> to get rid of it, choose what is better for readability /
> maintenance).

I would propose to squash this one to the earlier commit and refactor
it in a way that I proposed. Having this part as a separate commit in
my opinion is a bit confusing.

/Jarkko