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  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, 27 Feb 2019 13:45:15 -0800
From:   Dave Hansen <>
To:     Yu-cheng Yu <>,,, "H. Peter Anvin" <>,
        Thomas Gleixner <>,
        Ingo Molnar <>,
Cc:     Andy Lutomirski <>, Borislav Petkov <>,
        Dave Hansen <>,
        Ingo Molnar <>, Shuah Khan <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/selftests/xsave: Introduce XSAVE tests

On 2/27/19 1:24 PM, Yu-cheng Yu wrote:
> In the past there were some issues resulting from additions to
> XSAVE/XSAVES.  Introduce a few tests to help detect issues early.

Thanks for doing this!

I wonder, though, if you can spend a little more time on these.  They
look a little "raw".  They're virtually free of comments and there is no
explanation of what the tests do or why they do them.  I honestly forget
things like what XSAVE has to do with fork() failing, for instance.

I'd question why we need 5 different .c files.  It also seems like
things like set_ymm() could be trivially factored into a .h rather than
making 5 copies of them.

selftests don't need to be perfect, but I think these could use a _bit_
more polish before merging.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists