linux-kernel - Re: Query about IPI as NMI (pseudo-NMI) support patches

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]

Date:   Mon, 02 Jan 2023 17:11:19 +0000
From:   Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
To:     Mukesh Ojha <quic_mojha@...cinc.com>
Cc:     lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Query about IPI as NMI (pseudo-NMI) support patches

Hi Mukesh,

On Mon, 02 Jan 2023 16:44:59 +0000,
Mukesh Ojha <quic_mojha@...cinc.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Marc,
> 
> I was looking similar support mentioned in below patch series.
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAFA6WYO0+LQ=mB1spCstt0cNZ0G+sZu_+Wrv6BKSeXqF5SRq4A@mail.gmail.com/#t
> 
> Wanted to check if there is chance of these patches to land in
> mainline ?

I certainly have no intention to merge it as is, specially as there is
no good usage model for it other than "but think of debug!".

We have exactly *one* SGI left. If we are going to lose it over such a
feature, I'd want a description of how we are going to share it
between potential users, and how we claw some currently used SGIs
back.

Until then, this is a proof of concept, and not much else.

Thanks,

	M.

-- 
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.