linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/Kconfig: make X86

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: <621e255f-f497-a324-b004-4cb9b84784d0@zhaoxin.com>
Date:   Tue, 10 Mar 2020 15:24:37 +0800
From:   Tony W Wang-oc <TonyWWang-oc@...oxin.com>
To:     "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
CC:     <tglx@...utronix.de>, <mingo@...hat.com>, <x86@...nel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <DavidWang@...oxin.com>,
        <CooperYan@...oxin.com>, <QiyuanWang@...oxin.com>,
        <HerryYang@...oxin.com>, <CobeChen@...oxin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/Kconfig: make X86_UMIP to cover any X86 CPU


On 10/03/2020 08:25, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 2020-03-09 13:36, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>>
>> If you're going to do that, is there even any use for that config option
>> at all?
>>
>> AFAICT, it adds ~1K to kernel text so we might just as well remove the
>> ifdeffery completely. The code ends up built in in 99% of the cases
>> anyway...
>>
> 
> Perhaps the super-tiny-embedded kernel guys care? Otherwise it seems
> pointless.

Agree, and I think leave this config to some users are meaningful.

Moreover, if remove the X86_UMIP config, a kernel-parameter like
"noumip" may be needed?

Sincerely
TonyWWang-oc

> 
> In general, once INTEL and AMD is enabled, it is just a matter of time
> until other (still existent) vendors add those features, at least for
> core features.
> 
> 	-hpa
> .
>