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, 29 Apr 2019 19:26:02 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <>
To:     Sean Christopherson <>
Cc:     Andrew Lutomirski <>,
        Steven Rostedt <>,
        Peter Zijlstra <>,
        Nicolai Stange <>,
        Thomas Gleixner <>,
        Ingo Molnar <>, Borislav Petkov <>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <>,
        "the arch/x86 maintainers" <>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <>,
        Jiri Kosina <>,
        Miroslav Benes <>,
        Petr Mladek <>,
        Joe Lawrence <>,
        Shuah Khan <>,
        Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <>,
        Tim Chen <>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <>,
        Mimi Zohar <>,
        Juergen Gross <>,
        Nick Desaulniers <>,
        Nayna Jain <>,
        Masahiro Yamada <>,
        Joerg Roedel <>,
        Linux List Kernel Mailing <>,,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] x86/ftrace: make ftrace_int3_handler() not to skip
 fops invocation

On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 5:45 PM Sean Christopherson
<> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 05:08:46PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> >
> > It's 486 based, but either way I suspect the answer is "yes".  IIRC,
> > Knights Corner, a.k.a. Larrabee, also had funkiness around SMM and that
> > was based on P54C, though I'm struggling to recall exactly what the
> > Larrabee weirdness was.
> Aha!  Found an ancient comment that explicitly states P5 does not block
> NMI/SMI in the STI shadow, while P6 does block NMI/SMI.

Ok, so the STI shadow really wouldn't be reliable on those machines. Scary.

Of course, the good news is that hopefully nobody has them any more,
and if they do, they presumably don't use fancy NMI profiling etc, so
any actual NMI's are probably relegated purely to largely rare and
effectively fatal errors anyway (ie memory parity errors).


Powered by blists - more mailing lists