linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/umip: Add emulation for 64-bit processes

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: <193CDEE9-B533-4BFE-972E-384C00359945@zytor.com>
Date:   Tue, 10 Sep 2019 07:32:33 +0100
From:   hpa@...or.com
To:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
CC:     Brendan Shanks <bshanks@...eweavers.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@...ux.intel.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        x86@...nel.org, "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/umip: Add emulation for 64-bit processes

On September 10, 2019 7:28:28 AM GMT+01:00, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
>
>* hpa@...or.com <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
>
>> I would strongly suggest that we change the term "emulation" to 
>> "spoofing" for these instructions. We need to explain that we do
>*not* 
>> execute these instructions the was the CPU would have, and unlike the
>
>> native instructions do not leak kernel information.
>
>Ok, I've edited the patch to add the 'spoofing' wording where 
>appropriate, and I also made minor fixes such as consistently 
>capitalizing instruction names.
>
>Can I also add your Reviewed-by tag?
>
>So the patch should show up in tip:x86/asm today-ish, and barring any 
>complications is v5.4 material.
>
>Thanks,
>
>	Ingo

Yes, please do.

Reviewed-by: H. Peter Anvin (Intel) <hpa@...or.com>
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.