[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <C3EBA85C-8708-4BAD-BB78-C975250BEFFF@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 21:12:06 +0000
From: "Bae, Chang Seok" <chang.seok.bae@...el.com>
To: "Macieira, Thiago" <thiago.macieira@...el.com>
CC: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"Lutomirski, Andy" <luto@...nel.org>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"mingo@...nel.org" <mingo@...nel.org>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"Brown, Len" <len.brown@...el.com>,
"Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
"Liu, Jing2" <jing2.liu@...el.com>,
"Shankar, Ravi V" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 12/26] x86/fpu/xstate: Use feature disable (XFD) to
protect dynamic user state
On Aug 18, 2021, at 14:04, Thiago Macieira <thiago.macieira@...el.com> wrote:
> But it's not the only possible solution. A future kernel could decide to leave
> some bits off and only enable upon request. That's how macOS/Darwin does its
> AVX512 support.
Even if XCR0 is ever switched, doesn’t XGETBV(0) return it for the *current*
task?
Thanks,
Chang
Powered by blists - more mailing lists