linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] MIPS: Introduce WAR_4KC

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: <alpine.DEB.2.21.2305192342180.27887@angie.orcam.me.uk>
Date:   Fri, 19 May 2023 23:51:40 +0100 (BST)
From:   "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...am.me.uk>
To:     Jiaxun Yang <jiaxun.yang@...goat.com>
cc:     "linux-mips@...r.kernel.org" <linux-mips@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] MIPS: Introduce WAR_4KC_LLSC config option

On Fri, 19 May 2023, Jiaxun Yang wrote:

> > Given the circumstances I think this should be `panic'.  You don't want 
> > to continue with a system that can randomly lock up.
> 
> I just checked how other architectures handle such situation, it seems like
> TAINT_CPU_OUT_OF_SPEC is a better option.

 That can be easily missed, just as a random message in the kernel log, 
even at a high priority, and LOGLEVEL_ERR is not particularly high even.  
For a system configuration that qualifies as not usable for any practical 
purpose I find this approach leaving something to desire.

> Panic in cpu_probe can be frustrating for users as it is earlier than initialisation
> of consoles so the panic message can never be read by users.

 Is there no early console support for the systems affected?

  Maciej