linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] x86/cache updates for 4.21

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:   Wed, 26 Dec 2018 12:26:12 -0800
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
Cc:     x86-ml <x86@...nel.org>, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] x86/cache updates for 4.21

On Sun, Dec 23, 2018 at 4:49 AM Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de> wrote:
>
>  - The generalization of the RDT code to accommodate the addition of AMD's
>    very similar implementation of the cache monitoring feature.

I've pulled this, but I think the new config option name is bad.

I think it should probably have been called "X86_RESCTRL" instead of
just "RESCTRL". That's way too generic a name for something that is
(at least currently) very much an x86 feature.

It not only is x86-specific right now, it's specific to very few
resources. It's not like this is some generic resource control, it's
very much about low-level CPU resources. That should show in the name.

I've left it alone, and maybe it might even be cross-architecture some
day (there's already a hack in the scheduler), but I think it's a bit
misleading to have so a common name for such a specialized thing.

Even if it some day gets to be cross-architecture and isn't limited to
x86, at that point it _still_ wouldn't be "RESCTRL", it would be
"CPU_RESCTRL" or something.

No?

                Linus