linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: Tree for Mar 25 (arch/x86/kvm/)

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: <7b71119b-4594-2535-24ba-2c59430e4f30@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 25 Mar 2020 17:26:20 +0100
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To:     Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>
Cc:     Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Mar 25 (arch/x86/kvm/)

On 25/03/20 17:14, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>> Doh, right.  I think the only solution for that one is to degrade it to
>> WARN_ON(1).
> I reproduced the error, give me a bit to play with the code to see if the
> BUILD_BUG can be preserved.  I'm curious as to why kvm_cpu_cap_mask() is
> special, and why it only fails with this config.
> 

I could not reproduce it, but I would not be surprised if there are
other configurations where the compiler cannot constant-propagate from
the reverse_cpuid struct into __cpuid_entry_get_reg.

Paolo