[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <FC0176FB-32CD-4E7D-8AC7-17452E40FDFE@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 21:37:58 +0000
From: "Bae, Chang Seok" <chang.seok.bae@...el.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
CC: "Macieira, Thiago" <thiago.macieira@...el.com>,
"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 14:17, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 08:43:50PM +0000, Bae, Chang Seok wrote:
>> Maybe I’m missing something, but I wonder what’s the difference
>> from reading XCR0.
>
> Wny, because adding another prctl() is too damn hard?
Well, IIUC, merely XGETBV(0) in the kernel instead of from userspace.
> What if this modus operandi of features userspace can use with kernel
> assistance but need an explicit request and are off otherwise, gets
> extended beyond XSAVE-managed features?
What if it never happens? It will be just the same as XGETBV(0). I think on
the flip side there is also a benefit of maintaining a simple API as possible.
Thanks,
Chang
Powered by blists - more mailing lists