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]
Date:   Mon, 10 Dec 2018 17:43:44 -0800
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     pavel@....cz
Cc:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        "the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
        Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, mhiramat@...nel.org,
        jbaron@...mai.com, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
        David.Laight@...lab.com, bp@...en8.de, julia@...com,
        jeyu@...nel.org, Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] x86/static_call: Add inline static call
 implementation for x86-64

On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 3:58 PM Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz> wrote:
>
> On Thu 2018-11-29 11:11:50, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > It might be better to use an empty REX prefix on x86-64 or something like that.
>
> It might be easiest to use plain old NOP, no? :-).

No. The whole point would be that the instruction rewriting is atomic wrt fetch.

If it's a "nop" + "second instruction", and the "nop" is overwritten
by "int3", then the second instruction could still be executed after
the "int3" has been written (because the other CPU just finished the
"nop".

So an empty rex prefix is very different from a one-byte nop, exactly
because it's executed atomically with the instruction itself.

              Linus

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ