linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] l1tf: drop the swap storage limit restriction when l1tf=off

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: <nycvar.YFH.7.76.1812092145510.17216@cbobk.fhfr.pm>
Date:   Sun, 9 Dec 2018 21:46:57 +0100 (CET)
From:   Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] l1tf: drop the swap storage limit restriction when
 l1tf=off

On Mon, 19 Nov 2018, Michal Hocko wrote:

> > > > > +				It also drops the swap size and available
> > > > > +				RAM limit restriction.
> > > > 
> > > > Minor nit: I think this should explicitly mention that those two things 
> > > > are related to bare metal mitigation, to avoid any confusion (as otherwise 
> > > > the l1tf cmdline parameter is purely about hypervisor mitigations).
> > > 
> > > Do you have any specific wording in mind?
> > > 
> > > It also drops the swap size and available RAM limit restrictions on both
> > > hypervisor and bare metal.
> > > 
> > > Sounds better?
> > > 
> > > > With that
> > > > 
> > > > 	Acked-by: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
> > > 
> > > Thanks!
> > 
> > Yes, I think that makes it absolutely clear. Thanks,
> 
> OK. Here is the incremental diff on top of the patch. I will fold and
> repost later this week. I assume people are still catching up after LPC
> and I do not want to spam them even more.

Is this queued anywhere in the meantime please?

Thanks,

-- 
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs