linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 2/5] entry: Add calls for save/restore auxiliary pt

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: <YvLT6FipPdSkCW/6@zn.tnic>
Date:   Tue, 9 Aug 2022 23:38:48 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/5] entry: Add calls for save/restore auxiliary
 pt_regs

On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 11:14:19PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Ira is right. If we want it for everything, then the generic code is the
> right place.

But what is "everything"? Currently, and AFAIU, it is for the PKS use
case on x86 only.

I'm not saying it should not be done this way eventually - all I'm
saying is we should not design "preemptively" before it is really needed
for other arches.

Unless putting it in generic code makes it all simpler and cleaner to
do, that is.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette