linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 0/6] x86/fpu: Allow PKRU to be (once again) written by ptrace

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]

Message-ID: <CAP045AozQWf8qKuusXy=1p7UynOHas7mNpMospCOHmMmP993=Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 16 Nov 2022 16:45:12 -0800
From:   Kyle Huey <me@...ehuey.com>
To:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
Cc:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        x86@...nel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        "Robert O'Callahan" <robert@...llahan.org>,
        David Manouchehri <david.manouchehri@...eup.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 0/6] x86/fpu: Allow PKRU to be (once again) written by ptrace

On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 3:31 PM Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com> wrote:
>
> On 11/15/22 15:09, Kyle Huey wrote:
> > Following last week's discussion I've reorganized this patch. The goal
> > remains to restore the pre-5.14 behavior of ptrace(PTRACE_SET_REGSET,
> > NT_X86_XSTATE) for the PKRU register (which was equivalent to a hardware
> > XRSTOR instruction).
>
> The new version looks great.  I've applied it.
>
> I did remove the stable@ tags for now.  There were a couple reasons for
> that.  First, most of the x86 stuff marked for stable@ goes via our
> tip/urgent branch and this doesn't seem super urgent.  It also touches
> code that's exposed in at least three separate UABIs, so I want a bit
> more soak time than x86/urgent normally provides.
>
> I have zero objections if anyone wants to submit it to stable@ after it
> hits Linus's tree.

Works for me, thanks.

- Kyle