linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] tools/x86/kcpuid: Add AMD leaf 0x8000001E

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: <YFDlLHsE7AhOgkDi@google.com>
Date:   Tue, 16 Mar 2021 10:04:44 -0700
From:   Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc:     Feng Tang <feng.tang@...el.com>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] tools/x86/kcpuid: Add AMD leaf 0x8000001E

On Tue, Mar 16, 2021, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 03:42:23PM +0800, Feng Tang wrote:
> > Also I'm wondering for some basic leaf and extended leaf which
> > may has different definition for different vendors, do we need
> > to seprate the csv to a general one and vendor specific ones.
> 
> Do you know of such?
> 
> Because AFAIK vendors own, more or less, each range. Like, Intel owns
> the base range and AMD the extended so there should be no conflicts
> actually...

There are no known conflicts, and all sorts of things would break horribly if
any CPU vendor (or hypervsior) were careless enough to redefine a CPUID bit.