linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 12/14] platform/x86/intel/ifs: Add current

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: <Y3F1+GRxRXO0YeUj@zn.tnic>
Date:   Sun, 13 Nov 2022 23:55:52 +0100
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>
Cc:     "Joseph, Jithu" <jithu.joseph@...el.com>,
        "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Thiago Macieira <thiago.macieira@...el.com>,
        "hdegoede@...hat.com" <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
        "markgross@...nel.org" <markgross@...nel.org>,
        "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>, "hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
        "Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org" 
        <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>,
        "patches@...ts.linux.dev" <patches@...ts.linux.dev>,
        "Shankar, Ravi V" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
        "Jimenez Gonzalez, Athenas" <athenas.jimenez.gonzalez@...el.com>,
        "Mehta, Sohil" <sohil.mehta@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 12/14] platform/x86/intel/ifs: Add current_batch sysfs
 entry

On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 01:33:50PM -0800, Tony Luck wrote:
> IMHO option 1 is following the microcode precedent of having the kernel
> construct the filename based on the {x86,model,stepping} fields of
> struct cpuinfo_x86.

You can't follow the microcode precedent if you have more than one file.

> I think option 2 isn't really doing the user any favors. Having them
> feed all the *.scan files they find in /lib/firmware/intel/ifs_0 to the
> driver to see which ones work becomes progressively worse in every CPU
> generation. Any script/app running tests is likely to do the ff-mm-ss
> filter itself ... so why have the kernel do it too?

So you think that feeding a sequence number is more intuitive?

I guess I've given all my arguments here but you folks don't see things
this way.

I guess time will show whether the sequence number thing was a good
idea.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

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