linux-kernel - Re: [patch V3 00/66] x86/fpu: Spring cleaning and PKRU sanitizing

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 24 Jun 2021 00:06:48 +0000
From:   "Bae, Chang Seok" <chang.seok.bae@...el.com>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
CC:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        "Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
        "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        "Yu, Yu-cheng" <yu-cheng.yu@...el.com>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        "Kan Liang" <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
        "Brown, Len" <len.brown@...el.com>,
        "Shankar, Ravi V" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [patch V3 00/66] x86/fpu: Spring cleaning and PKRU sanitizing

On Jun 22, 2021, at 13:02, Bae, Chang Seok <chang.seok.bae@...el.com> wrote:
> On Jun 21, 2021, at 15:22, Bae, Chang Seok <chang.seok.bae@...el.com> wrote:
>> I tried to apply AMX patches on top of this. The test looks to be okay by far.
>> I will also give an update here if I find anything.
> 
> This looks to be vague about the test. I took cases shown in AMX v5 like this:
> 	https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210523193259.26200-24-chang.seok.bae@intel.com/
> It validates AMX state with context switches, signal delivery/return, and
> context injection via ptrace.

Also, just for the record, as the next AMX version is imminent:

Lots of AMX-related code are mostly function name changes and I had to
readjust my assumption. (Maybe this is not conclusive yet as still digesting
the code.) But I think the rebase went well with the test results, and this
change improves the mainline in many ways that affect adjusting AMX code in
the right way.

Thanks,
Chang